Needs-matching navigator system

ABSTRACT

A needs-matching navigator system and social network facilitator appurtenances including, for a large user plurality, software driven modules residing on electronic communications enabled platforms and devices. Beyond altruistically enhancing flourishing life horizons and life quality metrics, the modules facilitate (A) knowing respective user bias, profile, perspective, wellbeing orientation, and privacy preference; (B) understanding user needs description and wellbeing criteria; (C) finding answer and solutions to the needs by user biased projecting the description onto electronically stored knowledge-bases; (D) matching the user to the answers and solutions; and preferably (E) creating an instant electronic communications interactive community for the respective user, by inverse projecting large subsets of the answers and solutions back onto the large plurality of users; according to said users&#39; profiles and needs descriptions. This navigable community may be classified into spontaneous castes; having various degrees of relevant understanding, expertise, experience, and/or curiosity about these answer and/or solution projections.

TECHNICAL FIELD

Generally, the present invention relates to software systems enabling aconvergence of understanding personal-situation and human-centricquestions with a convergence of providing respectively appropriateanswers, advice, opportunities, affiliations, and associations.Alternately stated, the present invention is directed to helpingindividuals achieve life-beneficial access to a convergence of datanetworks with social networks. More specifically, the present inventionrelates to a plurality of software collaborating systems directed toexpanding the universe-of-choice for those seeking answers andalternatives, and to facilitating appropriate social networkingrelationships therewith; which typically include associated electroniccommunications conduits.

BACKGROUND ART

In order to appreciate new, useful, and innovative aspects of theNeeds-Matching Navigator System (hereinafter “MNS”), a closer look atsome basic metrics is appropriate; metrics such as “best”,“life-beneficial”, and even “orientation”. These and other terms (aswill be described hereinafter) will be used to portray aspects which maybe helpful for a user to increase his long-term life-flourishing level;which in-turn are metrics which often may convey vastly differentquantitative and qualitative valuations. Simply stated, to teach MNSembodiments, many subjective evaluations (and associated terms of theart) will be objectified in their respective contexts.

For example, “search engines” generally operate to answer user queries.Today, these queries are typically expressed as a series of key words,and are typically understood as a collection of synonyms and phrases,which are built from combinations of those words and synonyms.

Search engines generally bias their results to queries according to apredetermined preference orientation. Some search engines bias “answers”according to commercial interests; such as competing advertisingcampaigns. Other search engines bias “answers” according to an evolvingguess about the profile of the questioner (user). User profiles aretypically built from the confluence of user query key words inconjunction with any profile disclosure by the user. In actual use, theuser profile is then often combined with presumptions about externalprofile data; which have a high likelihood of being descriptive of thequestioner. In contrast, internal search engines (such as those used atcall centers) operate against a background of service agreements,customer contracts, supplier specifications, management policies, andassociated documentation libraries; which may be constantly updated orrandomly out-of-date. Thus in most cases, an answer from a search engineis biased in favor of various search engine owner interests; even if atthe expense of the questioner (user) by providing biased less-than-bestquery results.

Now, even if a search engine were altruistically trying to provide a“best” answer to a user query, this very notion “best” has a multitudeof meanings; both subjective and even objective. A simple notion “best”may indeed be straightforward for single variable equations; where abest result is a maximum or a minimum value result. For slightly morecomplex multi-variable equations (or more typical simultaneous equationssets), finding “best” may first reduce a problem to a smaller number ofaggregated variables. Common examples of dual aggregated variables are“risk” and “reward, “psychological” and “physical”, “cost” and“benefit”, and the like. However objective such a transformation mayseem, subjective factors inherently perturb these assignments and theirrespective quantification. Accordingly, seeking an optimal trade-offbetween dual aggregated variables, while simplifying the mathematicsrequired, typically introduces subjective biases; thereby putting thequality of the solution as “best” into doubt.

Even if multivariate problems (the abstract user “query”) could beobjectively quantified and mathematically optimized, for long termoperations, where many decision are made, a best strategy may not evenbe the sequence of the best decisions. Some well known examples are thefamous gambits and sacrifices in chess, the diversions in battle, andthe “false flag” attack in politics. Marketing, health care, gametheory, and even complex industrial fabrication protocols all involvesearching such respectively complex solution spaces; where often, anovel heuristic will find an example of a class of better results than acurrently accepted “best practices” teaches.

Exploring the complexity of finding a best solution to a multivariateproblem, one step further, all problems suffer from the influence ofhidden variables, combined effects of tertiary factors, flaws in thereduction of the problem to an abstract representation (a query), andfalsifiability issues; which are inherent to the “culture” of the user(who brings the query), the search engine or expert (who answers thequery), and (returning to the underlying mathematics and logic of thequestion-answer asymmetry) how the temporal resolution of the respectiveissues are considered. One instant example of this issue will suffice.If the standard medical protocol says that best practice is for apatient with symptom “A” to be treated with procedure “B”, then theattending physician should still (at least) ask if that is as true for afive year old patient as it would be for a ninety five year old patient.Economic example of this style of strategic error are to be found incountless case studies of corporate history; and in the analysis of thedecline of nations and of empires.

Simply stated, there is a longstanding need in the art for improvementsin the contextual appreciation of “best”; particularly when sortinganswers to a query and considering the respective questioner'scircumstances. Returning to the very beginning of this section,“life-beneficial” and even “orientation” represent aspects ofappropriate knowledge management that are worthy of consideration; andmay be objectified as metrics, per se.

While tersely summarized as a longstanding need, there are interesting,relevant, and significant prior art discussions for human centric datasystems; even including associated social networking. Some typicalexamples are:

-   -   http://cognexus.org/wpf/wickedproblems.pdf “Wicked Problems and        Social Complexity” Chapter 1 of Dialogue Mapping: Building        Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems, by Jeff Conklin, Ph.D.,        Wiley, October 2005. This book is about collective intelligence:        the creativity and resourcefulness that a group or team can        bring to a collaborative problem.    -   http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/handle/10183/25515/000753513.pdf?        . . . 1 “Memetic Networks: problem-solving with social network        models” Ricardo Matsumura De Araújo; 2010. “We frame problem        solving as a search for valid solutions in a state space and        propose a model—the Memetic Network—that is able to perform        search by using the exchange of information, named memes,        between actors interacting in a social network. Such model is        applied to a variety of scenarios and we show that the presence        of a social network greatly improves the system capacity to find        good solutions.”    -   http://www.infosys.tuwien.ac.at/research/viecom/papers/ICSOC2013-SCUProvisioning.pdf        “Provisioning Quality-aware Social Compute Units in the Cloud”        Muhammad Z.C. Candra, Hong-Linh Truong, and Schahram Dustdar;        Distributed Systems Group, Vienna University of Technology. “To        date, on-demand provisioning models of human-based services in        the cloud are mainly used to deal with simple human tasks        solvable by individual compute units (ICU). In this paper, we        propose a framework allowing the provisioning of a group of        people as an execution service unit, a so-called Social Compute        Unit (SCU), by utilizing clouds of ICUs. Our model allows        service consumers to specify quality requirements, which contain        constraints and objectives with respect to skills,        connectedness, response time, and cost. We propose a solution        model for tackling the problem in quality-aware SCUs        provisioning and employ some meta-heuristic techniques to solve        the problem. A prototype of the framework is implemented, and        experiments using data from simulated clouds and consumers are        conducted to evaluate the model.”    -   http://eprints.rclis.org/7971/1/isic98+paper.pdf “Evolving        Perspectives of Human Information Behavior: Contexts,        Situations, Social Networks and Information Horizons” Diane H.        Sonnenwald; University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. “This        paper presents an evolving framework of human information        behavior. The framework emerges from theories and empirical        studies from a variety of research traditions, including        information science, communication, sociology and psychology,        that inform our understanding of human information behavior.        First, fundamental concepts, such as context, situation, and        social networks, are discussed. Using these concepts, a series        of propositions that strive to elucidate, that is, provide a        framework for exploring, human information behavior are        proposed. Information human information behavior, including        information exploration, seeking, filtering, use, and        communication, are included (to varying degrees) in the        framework. The framework also incorporates cognitive, social,        and system perspectives. A key conception the framework is the        notion of an “information horizon.” Within any context and        situation is an “information horizon” in which individuals can        act. Information horizons, which may consist of a variety of        information resources, are determined socially and individually,        and may be conceptualized as densely populated solution spaces.        In a densely populated solution space, many solutions are        assumed, and the information retrieval problem expands from        determining the most efficient path to the best solution, to        determining how to make possible solutions visible—to an        individual(s) and to other information resources.”

Thus, it is fair to say that there are various search engines,heuristics and systems which consider (or could be used to consider)needs matching; particularly if the needs could be expressed andunderstood, and particularly if the respective questioner's (user's)“life-beneficial” “orientation” could somehow be appropriately convolvedto stratify a cloud of possible respective answers. Alternately stated,there is still an need in the art of needs matching for improvements ofneeds expression, needs understanding, “life-beneficial” “orientation”convolution, answers stratification, and the like. Furthermore,typically of greater importance, having arrived at a perhaps best set ofappropriate answers to a question, there is a longstanding need to“best” match at least one of these answers to a real-world opportunityfor a respective realization.

Returning to the example of a medical procedure, the first part of a“best” answer is knowing what the “best” appropriate medical procedurewould be, and the next part is (or may be) “best” matching that answerto actual real-world availability within the real constraints of cost,time, and the like. Simply stated, in the context of a user'scircumstance, “life-beneficial” and “orientation” are not necessarilysynergistic; so navigation of needs-matching is likewise a longstandingproblem aspect, in search of improvement.

Another longstanding need is expressed from the emerging abundance ofSocial Network Facilitator Appurtenances; each, in some aspect,attempting to enable a respective advice networks. Wikipedia'sdescription of “Virtual Community” (VC) suggests that: VC (socialnetworks) “all encourage interaction, sometimes focusing around aparticular interest or just to communicate. Some virtual communities doboth. Community members are allowed to interact over a shared passionthrough various means: message boards, chat rooms, social networkingsites, or virtual worlds”; and then goes on to describe exemplary VCsthat are focused on health, civic participation, and communications.Apparently, all of the examples diverge from scalability, asorganizational behavior and economics begin to conflict with thegeneralization of ordinary use.

Two exemplary Social Network Facilitator Appurtenances are respectivelyfrom Microsoft and more recently from Google.

“Windows Live Spaces”, originally released in 2004 as “MSN Spaces” andshut down in 2011, was a set of general-purpose tools for users to reachout to others; by publishing their thoughts, photos and interests. Amongits many fatal shortcomings, Windows Live Spaces failed to scale up intothe sparseness of cyberspace. Simply enabling interactive web-publishingdid not answer amorphous needs of human connectivity; nor was iteconomically competitive with other similar social networkingfacilitators.

Google+ (pronounced “Google Plus”; previously called “Google Circles”)is considered the Google's fourth social networking appliance(2011—ongoing), following Google's “Orkut” (2004—ongoing; Brazil only),“Google Friend Connect” (2008-2012), and “Google Buzz” (2010-2011).Google+ apparently serves two functions; giving users a mutual socialnetworking appliance and providing Google with a centralized profile forGoogle Services (YouTube, Gmail, Google Maps, etc.). While Google+ helpsGoogle to build a unified user-tracking monetization profile, there isno indication that this profile is being applied to altruisticallyadvance the user's wellbeing; neither according to any vaguehuman-centric Google wellbeing concept, nor according to any explicitmaturing respective user's wellbeing concept.

Furthermore, since these needs remain unanswered, a plethora ofnarrow-purpose social networking facilitator systems have emerged; suchas “Social Network and Location-Based Employment Placement System andMethod” [US 20130073474]—which is “directed to an on-line and mobilelocation-based system blending social, security and communicationcomponents to help persons, including youth, find employment andinternship opportunities within a community. Utilizing users' socialnetworks, Geo-location, dynamic and real-time information feeds, andproprietary prediction and security technologies, the disclosed systemprovides a system to create validated personal profiles for job seekersand posters, to browse and search job listings, to communicate aboutwith other users about employment opportunities. The present invention('474) also assists job posters and organizations to communicate aboutavailable projects within their hyper-local area.” The very narrownessof this '474 system (“without prejudice”) testifies to a knowledgeengineering failure; to enable open-purpose needs-matching systems.

Accordingly, the longstanding needs for progress in global peer-to-peercommunications, according to best practices of Need-Matching issues(spontaneously arising for respective individuals' problems andcircumstances), remain in search of progress; particularly scalableprogress. More broadly stated, finding “the anyone who can bestcontribute to an appropriate solution to a problem of any-someone” wouldbe an altruistic milestone event in human history; and progress in thatdirection is what each of us (in our hearts) would consider evidence ofa better world. In the light of universal access to globalcommunications, no cry for help should go unanswered; and no confusionor ambiguity about the nature of that cry nor the peculiarity of thathelp should stand as a barrier to enabling best-practices answering.

DISCLOSURE OF INVENTION Contextual Definitions

By way of introduction, an objective of embodiments of theNeeds-Matching Navigator System (referred to herein as “MNS”) is tocreate, facilitate, and/or manage a social network of members; toaccess, integrate, and/or improve ICT (Information CommunicationTechnology), and/or to help MNS members improve their lives. Anotherobjective is to help MNS users to find and define their needs and/or tomatch the best solutions available to their needs. It is a particularobjective to facilitate methods to define their needs, to locate and/orconfigure solutions to match their needs, answer their needs, solvetheir needs, and/or improve their needs (e.g. direct them to ways andmeans for revitalizing their condition). Furthermore, another objectiverelates to optimization, maturing purpose, and/or improvement of thelife of each MNS user and/or groups that the user is a member of.

Stylized grammatical references herein to a male gender and/or to afemale gender are not intended to be understood as gender specific,gender biased, gender restricted, nor gender relevant.

Now, for convenience of expression, the following alphabetically-listedterms (with their introductory descriptions, discussions, anddefinitions) relate to instantiations, items, attributes, concepts, andaspects; which are used in the context of the MNS examples andcomponents, and are respectively further described therein.

Appurtenance: Any hardware and/or software and/or data-product accessory(or other item) associated with MNS; including MNS user/member socialnetworking; MNS user/member privacy preserving data-product access andinteraction for MNS non-members; MNS related portals and archives; MNSgraphic interfaces and formats; graphic link-organizers, and the like

Convolve: To apply a first function, definition, or dataset onto asecond function, definition, or dataset in order to produce a thirdfunction, definition, or dataset; that is typically viewed as a modifiedversion of one of the original first function, definition, or dataset;an expression of orderly complexity that was derived from facile-scalemechanical usages: to wind or to roll or to coil or to twist together;accordingly to convolve is to form the convolution of something withsomething else and/or to compute a respectively defined convolutionfunction descriptive thereof; accordingly being convoluted implies beingcomplex, being intricate, or being complicated. Regarding descriptiveand quantitative data, a convolution is a data set transformationperformed according to some necessary combination of logical andfunctional applications; as would be understood by a databaseadministration professional.

From another vantage, symbols and referents involve different protocolsof convolution.

Symbols may express a need to know, and other symbols may answer thatneed; in the form of documents and explanations. Search engines mayprovide these documents and MNS social networking may provide teachersand/or colleagues to help understand these documents. Simply stated, inmany cases knowledge needs apparently only require knowledge answers;whereas in fact they often require educational processes to understandthat knowledge.

Referents may express a physical need, such as for food, clothing,shelter, medical treatment, care, community, or the like. Solutions toreferent needs often involve a convolution of knowledge, logistics,physical resources, and actions.

Simply stated, referent needs typically require solutions, which in turninclude a need for respective answers.

For answering complex needs to know and for answering most referentneeds, beyond any process to understand these needs, there typically arevarious strategies and scenarios to decompose these needs intosub-problems, answer the sub-problems, answer the recombination of thesub-problem answers, and convolve the sub-problem answers and therecombination answers back into a solution to the referent need. Forexample, a need for food may be subdivided into finding the food, payingfor the food, and delivering the food; which must be respectively solvedand convolved back together in a logistically coherent way.

Currencies: Various real and abstract monetary units are oftensignificant when dealing with realities of appropriate costs, funding,income, expenses, and the like. Furthermore, there is sometimes apreference to define several components, such as cost of a solution,range of cost that the user prefer, donation cost, reward, price forproviding information or solution, or the like.

The currencies can be combination of real currencies (dollar, Euro,etc.), commodities (gold, silver, etc.), virtual currency (flightmileage, Bit-coins, coupons, vouchers, etc.), services (an hour ofhelping someone, community service, etc.), or the like. Furthermorecurrencies may include indexing (cost of basket of products, cost ofliving, etc.), or to an arbitrarily defined MNS virtual currency, or toshares in a company or in aggregate of companies (NASDAQ Composite, S&P500, Russell 1000, NYSE Composite, DJ US TSM Index, etc.), or to asocial network (such as including membership, access, rights,privileges, status, or notoriety therein), or to the valuation of sharesin the organisation(s) which operate a MNS. Furthermore, MNS preferablydefines an optional or arbitrary exchange mechanism—to swap or translateor exchange one type of currency to another type.

For Currency related “Wellbeing Currency”, see “Disclosure ofInvention—Description of Embodiments” section (below).

Database: Any list, file, repository, taxonomy, or knowledge-base thatis electronically stored and enabled for searching therein. Also, asoftware driven “Information Repository Management” module for managingrespective selected MNS module derived digital data information as atleast one knowledge-base Information Repository; and the InformationRepository includes a plurality of networked data storage libraries,gateway type protocol for information interfacing there-between, and athird-party-accessible information auditing-review record thereof.

For Database related “Projection”, see “Disclosure ofInvention—Description of Embodiments” section (below).

Members: Users of embodiments of MNS; and/or a trustworthy person,representative, caretaker, trustee, parent, guardian, software, or robotwhich take care of some respective user relationship—ostensibly directedto improve the respective MNS user's life.

For Members related “Caste”, see “Disclosure of Invention—Description ofEmbodiments” section (below).

Needs: Circumstances and expressions of circumstances which cansubstantially be hierarchically classified into attributes and/or tags;also synonyms, replacements, translations, and substitutions—which canbe expressed as a decomposition of one to many, a direct transformationof one to one, a convolution of many to one, or a frame of referencesuperposition substitution of some to others, or the like.

Needs may relate to referents (such as products, services, purposes,methods, applications, another human being, a group, an organization, apartner, an institution (such as a University), a potential answer to adecision, a subject for further study, a type of food, an exercise, orthe like) or they may refer to a combination of knowledge and respectiveunderstanding. Needs may be expressed as questions; such as “What isgood for me according to my state and priorities?”, “What type ofeducation will be best for my child”, etc. Accordingly, as is reasonablefor the complexity and ambiguity of any expression of needs, potentialsolutions for the needs and potential providers of such solutions are tobe understood as being in the context of various respective theories andmodels; which may be far from definitive, inclusive of uncertainty andambiguity, and inclusive of indeterminate dependencies. Preferably, forsolutions having geographic proximity components, a map will be providedor generated with location information to better express constraints onusers' needs, solutions, suppliers, and the like.

For Needs related “Needs Description”, see “Disclosure ofInvention—Description of Embodiments” section (below).

Profile: Typically, any exemplary combination of (A) user provideddisclosure about the user, such as name, age, address, occupation,education, memberships, free-form descriptions (even including factual,emotional, and perceptual aspects), or the like; (B) descriptions andcharacterizations of the user that can be discovered using public databases, private health records (with user permission), commercialdatabases, or even from comments or rank or grade provided by otherusers, or the like; (C) real time or summary metrics received about theuser, such as GPS location of his mobile device, physiology monitoringupdates, a vibration spectrum from an accelerometer of his mobiledevice, or the like; and (D) metrics discovered that furthercharacterized the metrics received, such as weather at the reportedlocation, risk or reward potential at the reported physiology, or thelike; (E) preferences and weights for attributes of potential solutionor need; etc.

Trust: Among aspects of MNS, a very important feature is a promise tomembers and users that MNS will try to find the best respective solutionto improve the user life—according to the users priorities; wherein nosuppliers can buy a change of priority for an MNS ordering list ofsolutions. MNS is intended as a quality standard of relationship forhelping the user, both to define his needs and to match these needs tobest solutions. Preferably each MNS embodiments instantiation isorganised as a not-for-profit organization; such as a social enterprise,trust, charity or foundation; or as an organization whose revenue andprofit will not be generated by promoting potential suppliers or byadvertising clicks or the like, but can be generated by a member's fees,a user's donations, contributions when receiving a good solution; orgeneral contributions, donations, or the like.

Accordingly, MNS suggests various methods of economic self sufficiency;without selling advertisement (as per the Google or Facebook advertisingsales economic models). MNS economic self sufficiency is by one or acombination of: donations, membership, cost reimbursement, donationcommitment for value of received solution, percentage (or other formula)from cost or value of a solution, or from a user payment for a solutionby a provider (commission). By one scenario, a user selecting an MNSsolution, which caused the user to transact with a provider, willlikewise commit the user to a fixed or proportional donation to MNS orto an MNS user-with-Needs. By another scenario, an MNS can be a freeservice, but encourages members to donate to a supplier who supplied theanswer to their needs; and a percentage of this donation will be donatedto the MNS. A transforming variation of this scenario is that the totaldonation will be paid to the MNS, and the MNS will pay some (or evenmost) of it to the supplier.

Another aspect of trust relates to data characterizing identity,profile, personalization, and preferences. When a user provides orallows MNS to keep, access, and monitor such data, then thresholds andpotential-triggers for needs may become actualized according topreferred, predetermined, predictive, or presumption parameters; such astime, location, individual information, and state (examples: tooth paincan be a trigger to a need to find a dentist; life events such as birth,wedding, death of a relative can be a trigger to specific needs—that theMNS can help the user to define and solve).

As an MNS can become a very comprehensive system, even in some specificareas, the ongoing comprehension process means that some verticaldomains or horizontal parameters may always include a higher density ofdetail and variability than others. Nevertheless, it is also possible touse the same software to manage MNS in several areas. For example: anMNS may include much more “knowledgeable” detail about some geographicalareas (country, state, province, city, etc.) than in others. Likewise,some specific domains of services or products may dominate the MNS“Needs-Knowledge portfolio”; such as those related to improvingwellbeing, health, or education. Furthermore, the MNS portfolio may bemore “understanding” for various age groups, social or politicalorientations, or other profile attribute than others; such that MNS maybe more relevant to young people, people belonging to a definable beliefgroup, or to a membership organizations (such as for people who careabout the environment, Green Party, parents, etc.).

Accordingly, in practice, trust nevertheless returns MNS embodiments tohave taxonomies, dictionaries, and networks of item-property-detailinstantiation relationships to help define and search needs, and to“target” appropriate solutions, compatible classes and attributes(including features, aspects, synonyms, sub-needs, sub-solutions, etc.).Items such as a members can be part of more than one group or class;such as according to location, gender, education, social group, specificchoice, etc. Needs and solutions also can be part of several classes;such as need of learning to manage and improve wellbeing can be part ofclasses of wellbeing, life skills, and education. Various furtheraspects of trust will emerge from the detailed MNS examples hereinafter.Another aspect of trust embedded in the MNS process is validation andconfirmation of any important information either reported by the user,or found by the MNS from another source.

Another aspect of trust relates to agreements between respective usersof the Needs-Matching Navigator System and an organization whichprovides enabled modules of the system; according to the presentinvention. The purpose such agreements, inter alia, is to create mutualtrust. An exemplary agreement includes, inter alia, undertakings whereby(I) the provider organization agrees (a) not to disclose confidentialand private information of the user to third parties without permissionof the respective user, (b) to enable the respective user to view andupdate the information that the provider manages regarding that user'sprofile, (c) to be honest and loyal to the respective user and try tohelp him/her to find the best solutions that match his/her needsaccording to his/her profile, preferences, and weighting criteria, and(d) not to be influenced by suppliers or advertisers in the provision ofSystem services to the respective user; and (II) the user undertakes (a)to be honest and provide true information to the System regardinghis/her identity, his/her information, and respective/ongoing feedbackthat he/she will provide in the future, and (b) to try to find and chosesolutions that may improve his/her wellbeing.

Wellbeing: A broadly accepted term-of-the-art which conforms to variousmulti-parametric quantification methodology definitions; albeit Wikidescribes it as “a general term for the condition of an individual orgroup, for example their social, economic, psychological, spiritual,satisfaction, health, or medical state; high wellbeing means that, insome sense, the individual or group's experience is positive, while lowwellbeing is associated with negative happenings.” Notwithstanding,wellbeing may be applied to relate to a narrow instantiation; such asthe wellbeing of a person's heart, liver, car, conditioner, and thelikes. Another example of a narrow instantiation of wellbeing is levelof user satisfaction from a specific solution that the MNS may provide.

Gallup-Healthways “Wellbeing Index” ® (registered trademark of Gallup,Inc) describes it as “how people think about and experience theirlives”; which then becomes a basis for respective extensive statisticalanalysis and discussion in their “State of American Wellbeing 2013State, Community, and Congressional District Analysis” Report. Inaddition to regional metrics, Gallup has extended this to the workplaceand to personal assessment programs; such as “The primary component ofGallup's Wellbeing program is the “Wellbeing Finder™” an assessment thatmeasures your wellbeing over time. When you take the “Wellbeing Finder™”you will receive a scorecard with your overall wellbeing score as wellas your score in each of the five essential areas of wellbeing: CareerWellbeing, Social Wellbeing, Financial Wellbeing, Physical Wellbeing,Community Wellbeing.” Gallup has gone further, by enabling threecommercial products: “Daily Challenge™” for individuals, “Blue ZoneProject™” for communities, and “Healthways™” for organizations. However,Gallup is far from alone in the development and application of wellbeingtechnologies.

On a still larger scale, wellbeing has become an almost competingstandard of metrics for national assessment. The National Accounts ofWellbeing Indicators on these websites represent working models ofmeasures which governments and NGOs use to monitor the wellbeing ofcitizens:

-   -   http://www.nationalaccountsofwellbeing.org/learn/measuring/indicators-overview.html;    -   http://www.oecd.org/general/compendiumofoecdwellbeingindicators.htm        & http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/#/12200515555;    -   http://www.oecd.org/statistics/Guidelines%20on%20Measuring%20Subjective%20Well-being.pdf;        and        http://www.wider.unu.edu/research/projects-by-theme/poverty-inequality/en_GB/social-development-indicators-measuring-human-wellbeing/.        A particular user-friendly ensemble of wellbeing definitions and        assessments are fully operational in Canada: such as ‘Indicators        of Wellbeing in Canada’ http://www4.hrsdc.gc.ca/h.4m.2@-eng.jsp        “gathers data from different sources and presents a        comprehensive, up-to-date picture of the Wellbeing of Canadians        and Canadian society.”

Each of these wellbeing definitions and countless other wellbeingontologies are respectively characteristic of the perspective of theseorganizations. However, in a larger context, that is in the MNS context,wellbeing is defined from the perspective of each user, scaled accordingto their respective profiles, and expanded according to clouds ofsynonyms, frequently occurring proximate word clusters, and the like.For the organizational examples cited, this is likewise substantiallytrue; because of the virtual certainty that even these organizationaldefinitions and ontologies will evolve over time; into other clusters oflabels, which chronologize transformational shifts of user perspective.

Alternately stated, “Wellbeing” relates to all life-process states;which typically includes exemplary domain-attributes, such as thosecharacterizing personal, family, physical, emotional, mental, social,career, financial, community, environmental, spiritual, subjectivehappiness, and like aspects.

For Wellbeing related “Wellbeing Orientation”, “Wellbeing Criteria”, and“Life Quality Metric”, see “Disclosure of Invention—Description ofEmbodiments” section (below).

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

In order to understand the invention and to see how it may be carriedout in practice, embodiments including the preferred embodiment will nowbe described, by way of non-limiting example only, with reference to theaccompanying drawings. Furthermore, a more complete understanding of thepresent invention and the advantages thereof may be acquired byreferring to the following description in consideration of theaccompanying drawings wherein:

FIG. 1 is a schematic view of a Needs-Matching Navigator System,including a respective MNS Social Networking feature for a user'sconsideration;

FIG. 2 is a schematic view of an MNS Graphical Link Organizer embodimentfor an exemplary user; and

FIG. 3 is a schematic view of an MNS Appurtenance for acceptable publicaccess.

DISCLOSURE OF INVENTION Industrial Applicability

A presentation of selected ergonomic, economic, and technical issueswhich highlight Advantages, Objects, and Benefits of embodiments of theNeeds-Matching Navigator System and respective Social NetworkFacilitator Appurtenance embodiments.

Ergonomic Issues: First, by example, a researcher is looking to find anappropriate grant for what the researcher actually does (rather thanrewrite what the researcher does to somehow fit an inappropriate grant)or a social worker is looking for a government or NGO program that bestfits a clients situation; and without prior experience for an identicalsituation or personal access to someone who by-luck happens to know, thecomplexity of matching a set of interrelated needs with a solution isdaunting, exhausting, and fraught with a sense of professionalincompleteness. Basically, for personal, family, and community issues,altruistic interactive knowledge has always been a scarce resource.Simply, good advice is hard to get, and good solutions to needs arestill harder to acquire. Still, today, a user's orientation and access,per se, to relevant appropriate-technology solutions is happening asknowledge and social networks respectively grow; and as commercial andeven national concerns increasingly dominate (according toconsiderations that are not intentionally concerned with userfriendliness).

If the emerging Knowledge Economy is ever to appreciate the wellbeing ofindividuals, then the ergonomics of information, understanding, andsocial relationships must become important beyond theirdiminishing-proportion individual-unit size. On one hand, as populationgrows, the individual is a smaller part of humanity; yet on the otherhand, as knowledge and social networks grow, the knowledge empoweredindividual can communicate and influence at a time scale ofappropriateness that is absolutely unprecedented. To illustrate, ifthere is a new horrendous disease anywhere and knowledge of it can reachthe individual who can best cure it, then (where altruisticcommunications are operating optimally) the disease is reduced tonegligible importance. Likewise, for every other problematicinstantiation in the corpus of human experience, a knowledge empoweredsocial network represents our best technology. MNS Embodiments of BestAppropriate Knowledge Ergonomics can better address that which competingideologies have heretofore failed to resolve. Ideologies arenon-scalable generalizations; while MNS is scalable to the individualand from the individual. Knowledge is not just a database of facts.Knowledge is the understanding of best practices of how to apply thosefacts; and networking to respective best appropriate Knowledgepractitioners is an ergonomic object of MNS.

Economic Issues: For mechanical, electronic, and software-centricsystems, instantiation cost seems to creep upward with increasingcomplexity; regardless of the economy of scale. This has been the basicrule for technology since the Renaissance. However, as the electronictopology of global empowered social networks transforms knowledge accessfrom hierarchical and trunking systems to true multi-virtual networks,the cost-of-access to best-quality wellbeing solutions for individualsshould radically shrink; because the distance between any twoindividuals (in the entirety of humanity) is approaching aspeed-of-light empowered constant, which is substantially instantaneous.This suggests the emergence of a new medium of exchange for facilitatingthe barter and distribution of wellbeing Knowledge; which musteventually have a higher valuation than the accumulation ofmore-familiar units of stored wealth.

From another vantage, for fungible commodities, monetary instruments(such as currency and commercial paper) are substantially viable; well,at least as adjusted by taxation, charity, and social programs. A moreparadoxical valuation issue comes to mind when honest people try to “payback” a favor; because there, the circumstances are as much a part ofthe valuation as the favor, per se, is. Knowledge, not in the abstractbut in the context of needs-matching and solutions-navigating, is lesslike a fungible commodity and more like a favor in the context of amaturing social relationship. This again suggests the emergence of a newmedium of exchange for facilitating the barter and distribution ofwellbeing. Accordingly, it is an object of MNS embodiments to helpfacilitate a fungible unit for wellbeing exchange; something that moneyhas proven that it can not buy.

Technical Issues: As with the development of all emerging technologies,components and even infrastructure exists; but a paradigm and viableconvolved embodiments for facilitating progress are wanting. Simplystated, as is almost always the case for inventions and innovations, thetechnical issue is not necessarily in finding the pieces, but in puttingthem together properly. As is so often the case in the history oftechnology, “properly” means having appreciated the relative importance,size, and strength of the components and of their mutual attachments;otherwise the embodiment fails, and the paradigm that conceived itreturns to the murky stew of an inventor's simmering ideas. For MNS,“properly” means with a diligent awareness of and concern for respectiveMNS user wellbeing.

Machines are not always defined as including gears or levers, nor metalparts or lubricated joints. Society is a machine. It is much in need ofimprovement; as is obvious from the wastes of wellbeing disparity,mission-forgotten wars, and other bubble-inspired fads. Perhaps thesimplest way to characterize best-relevant knowledge in social networksis re-thinking (new algorithms and associated use of data structures)for navigating that knowledge between needs and solutions. Furthermore,perhaps social-technology progress is more about finding better systemsfor helping individuals, families, neighborhoods, communities, and otherstill larger groups to cooperate; by at least considering better answersand solutions to their respective needs. Life's verycomplexity-of-variability challenges this simplistic assessment; even asevery persons' respective technical problem is an ever changing searchto better their wellbeing.

If we were considering the engineering of a better being, then there isa case for investing in more brain (or wisdom); because war, vandalism,and domestic violence are proof that there is already too much brawn.MNS is a scalable workman's improvement to the technology of knowledgenetworks, as they converge with social networks; and a system toindividualize them into humanity networks. In some aspects, MNSconstitutes new use for existing technology. In other aspects MNSconstitutes changes and improvements in those technologies; to make MNSmore user friendly, more trustworthy, and more sensitive to uservariability. This vantage is better appreciated from the any examplewhere understanding knowledge is a substantial improvement beyond thebase threshold of finding that knowledge. By example, for any machine orcomponent thereof, respectively understanding it better is necessary toenable/cause a better use of it; likewise, for any social, economic,psychological, spiritual, emotional, or medical aspect.

Nevertheless, MNS also relates to narrow wellbeing-inspired knowledgeengineering tools; such as (A) a Graphical Link Organizer (“GLO”), whichhelpful for user's understanding of results from an MNS type inquiry foranswers and solutions, and which is helpful for understanding mosthighly multi-parametric knowledge base extractions; (B) an MNSAppurtenance providing an alternative public access electroniccommunications protocol; (C) to electronic facilitation of a userappropriate social networking search-and-surf transitioning environmentexperience; and to numerous other wellbeing-maturation products,supports, and services. An MNS GLO embodiment may include audio content,audio interpretation, audio recognition, text to voice transformation,voice to text transformation, grammar parsing, language translation, andthe like.

DISCLOSURE OF INVENTION Description of Embodiments

The aforesaid longstanding needs are significantly addressed byembodiments of the present invention, which specifically relates toconverging Knowledge Networks with Social Networks. The instantalgorithms, methodologies, and protocols are especially useful innetworking to a best appropriate Knowledge practitioner; and forfacilitating a fungible unit for wellbeing exchange.

In this context, it is significant to note that MNS is substantiallyabout social networking; wherein each member wants to improve hisrespective wellbeing and to help others to improve their respectivewellbeing, and wherein each member trusts the service and theinformation which MNS provides. Likewise, it is significant to note thatrespective user trust of MNS is substantially because he appreciatesthat (according to substantially best practices) all the MNS informationis reliable and validated by the MNS's process; and he also appreciatesthat MNS will not be biased by any potential seller or provider, butwill try to find the best solution for the respective user's needs andcriteria.

Accordingly, for a new user (for whom MNS does not hold any informationwith regards to his wellbeing orientation, wellbeing criteria, andsuch), by one exemplary scenario, when this new user would like to finda best solution (or list of best solutions) for a specific needaccording to his criteria (wherein the criteria is similar to wellbeingcriteria: a weighted preference list of attributes/features/aspects forhis needs or the solutions he's looking for), then MNS will find thebest solution or list of solutions, that will maximize the user'ssatisfaction, according to the user's weighted criteria for theattributes (including features, aspects, etc) and the rating of thesesolutions (including rating of the attributes by experienced users).

Simply stated, for MNS, navigating a user to communicate with someonewho understands relevant knowledge is usually more important tofacilitating solving a user need than is finding that relevantknowledge. More simply stated, IF a user understood the relevantknowledge (required to answer his need), THEN the user only may need aKnowledge Network (search engine and knowledge base); ELSE the userneeds (MNS) a Social Network (Navigator) to help educate the user abouthow to apply relevant knowledge (to answer his need). Most simplystated, every user with a need would feel more confident if (using anMNS) the user could get quality advice from someone more knowledgeablein the area of his need—if that someone was also sensitive to what mightbe appropriate to the user's circumstances. Often that special MNSsomeone is either an expert in that area of need or at least is anindividual who has already experienced traversing a substantiallysimilar need, or an experience biased software module that can providesuch expert knowledge, or the like.

Turning to FIG. 1 , this invention relates to numerous embodiments,variations, and constructions of a needs-matching navigator system (100)(and to related social network facilitator appurtenances) for a largeuser plurality. The system includes software driven modules residing onelectronic communications enabled platforms and devices (110). Beyondaltruistically enhancing flourishing life horizons and life qualitymetrics, the modules facilitate (A) knowing (120) respective user bias,profile, perspective, wellbeing orientation, and privacy preference; (B)understanding (130) user needs description and wellbeing criteria; (C)finding (140) answers and solutions to the needs by user biasedprojecting (relevantly compliant with the user's wellbeing orientationand criteria—which in turn must be the user's respective need) of thedescription onto electronically stored knowledge-bases; (D) matching(150) the user to the answers and solutions; and preferably (if neededor if indicated as user desirable) (E) creating (160) an instantelectronic communications interactive community for the respective user,by inverse projecting large subsets of the answers and solutions backonto the large plurality of users; according to the users' profiles andneeds descriptions. Furthermore, this navigable community may beclassified into spontaneous castes; having various degrees of relevantunderstanding, expertise, experience, and/or curiosity about theseanswer and/or solution projections.

MNS is vastly scalable family of embodiments, instantiations,variations, and appurtenances. For clarity of understanding MNS, here isa simple “most everyone is experiencing this” type example, where MNScan positively impact an ongoing issue; improving the quality ofself-education. Other examples might relate to (A) configuring acollection of knowledge, goods, services, infrastructure and financingto help solve a problem; (B) configuring a transition from a virtualcommunity of individuals with a similar goal into a sub-set physicalcommunity of mutually proximity individuals; and the like. After thesimple “most everyone is experiencing this” type example is described,some MNS context terminology and numerous MNS embodiments will bedescribed in increasing detail.

A simple scenario MNS example: “Self-Education” (formally called“Auto-didactic-ism”) is perhaps the best way to consider the self-studyphenomenon of Internet “searching and surfing”; which is an ebb and flowof a user's “need to know” and the user's “natural curiosity”. Anongoing next phase of this self-study phenomenon is the sharing ofInternet links; between the user and his friends, associates,social-networking community, or the like. These shared Internet linksare to most anything, from timely articles and organized coursematerials, to obscure movies and mundane personal photographs. Now, onthe one hand, everyone would like a partner to “search and surf” with;but, on the other hand, the individual's impulsive intellectualcuriosity is stifled by consensus issues arising in such a partnership.(The situation is much akin to a once-typical family trying to agree towatch a single TV station broadcast program together.) A generic MNSembodiment would seem to provide much of the self study assistance thata typical Internet solo-adventurer is wanting.

Accordingly, to help appreciate MNS, rather than instantly outlining anddetailing such an MNS embodiment, here is a script of how such aself-education MNS Internet accompaniment episode might play out:

JJ (an MNS user) shares lots of data with MNS. Knowing and understandingJJ becomes a maturing relationship process for MNS. JJ has given MNSlots of personal profile information. This profile information about JJincludes: age, gender, location, education, language, motivationalstatements, likes, and dislikes; JJ's answers to at least one MNSrespective personal profile relevant questionnaire about JJ's wellbeingorientation; JJ's free-text essay about short-term and long-termwellbeing goals; and JJ's privacy preferences instructions to MNS.Furthermore, sharing JJ's concern for privacy, MNS lets JJ view the wayMNS sees JJ, the data that MNS has collected (from elsewhere) about JJ,and lets JJ comment on his degree of acceptance or rejection of any ofthese JJ associated profile attributes (including features, aspects,synonyms, sub-needs, sub-solutions, etc.). In considerations to JJ'swellbeing regarding JJ's own privacy, MNS provides JJ with a monitor ONmonitor OFF switch; so that JJ can always change from his generalprivacy preferences to total privacy—whenever and for however long JJsets the MNS monitor to OFF.

For example, JJ's privacy preferences allow MNS to monitor JJ'ssearching and surfing activities; albeit—not to monitor JJ's activityfrom the moment that JJ begins to enter information into a site; whichblocks MNS from tracking much of JJ's on-line commercial activities. JJallows MNS to monitor JJ's chat room texts, JJ's email content (albeitnot to monitor email addresses), and JJ's text editing of documents onJJ's device or with JJ's cloud account. However, JJ prohibits MNS fromsharing JJ's profile or activity data with anyone; except if JJ agreesto that anyone, and only after JJ reviews and approves the data contentthat is to be shared. Simply stated, there is a bond of Trust between JJand MNS.

In the context of self-study, MNS monitors what JJ searches for, whichsites JJ visits, how long JJ stays on those sites, and what notes JJmakes or copies while visiting those sites. The allowed monitoringprovides MNS with an ongoing history of JJ's many changing wellbeingcriteria and a cumulative portrait of JJ's education level.

Now, MNS considers lots factors to better understand JJ. To texts thatJJ authors and/or copies, MNS may apply at least one (standard)readability formula (typically expressed as “reading level”), grammarchecker, spelling checker, and vocabulary level; which gives MNS someunderstanding of JJ's grade-equivalent level of literacy andarticulation. MNS may also look at Internet sites that JJ visits, andconsider the level literacy and articulation level of these sites, howlong JJ was there, how fast JJ scrolled or navigated through the site,and the context of text (or graphics or formulas) that JJ may havecopied from the site—which JJ then used to surf and search further. Inaddition, MNS may look at the amount of passive, active, and interactivegraphics on the site. MNS may also notice the frequency of numbers,formulas, definitions, and variables in JJ's text and in Internet sitesthat JJ visits; to better approximate JJ's level of quantitative and/ormathematical reasoning.

According to how well MNS knows and understands JJ, MNS can now help JJimprove the self-study experience; by giving JJ a self-study navigatorinterface. Turning to FIG. 2 , for JJ's current search & surf query, anMNS GLO chart (200) may be graphically manifest as a pop-up on JJ'slarge screen device or may be substantially manifest as JJ's entirescreen; such as when JJ is using a smaller screen device—be it handheld, wrist worn, smart-spectacles embedded, or the like. There are atleast two views of this MNS GLO chart; a GLO low resolution overview anda GLO higher resolution user navigating fish-eye overlay view.

The GLO low resolution overview, to a casual observer, looks like a mapwith some vertical and horizontal row-column quadrant defining referencelines; and scattered across the map are clusters of symbols (and/or dotsor pixels or glyphs or letters or icons or thumbnail-pictures or thelike) of various sizes, of which some may be color coded and others maybe flashing (or twinkling). This is a chart-like overview organizationof needs matching answers and solutions to an exemplary JJ-query (or aJJ needs description—including at least one JJ-providedneeds-appropriate wellbeing criteria). Part of an overview chart is userorganized and part of the chart is MNS organized (for the user, or forall users as a default) The user has a dynamic assignable map legendthat lets the user define categories of answers and solutions; and toassign colors, flashing frequency, symbols, or the like toinstantiations of these categories. Likewise, MNS has some predefinedmap legend assignments too.

Returning to the organization of the overview chart of symbolsrepresenting respective JJ answers and solutions, row (210) includesthose at JJ's current reading level, row (212) includes those at about agrade above JJ's current reading level, row (214) includes those atabout a grade below JJ's current reading level, row (216) includes thoseexplained for JJ's real or potential teacher—who is more than about agrade above JJ in reading level, and row (218) includes those explainedfor JJ's real or potential student—who is more than abut a grade belowJJ's reading level. If the nature of the answers and solutions relate toformulas and/or mathematical reasoning, then rows may be used forrespective mathematics level rather than respective reading level.Likewise, for answers and solutions involving both, reading andmathematics levels are Boolean convolved and assigned to rows; toemulate equivalent JJ respective levels.

Now, the organization of the overview chart columns, for each respectivequery or needs description, is column (220) for results substantiallycompliant with JJ's wellbeing orientation and with JJ's wellbeingcriteria, column (222) for results substantially compliant with JJ'swellbeing criteria but substantially lacking compliance with JJ'swellbeing orientation, column (224) for results substantially compliantwith JJ's wellbeing orientation but substantially lacking compliancewith JJ′ criteria, column (226) for results substantially compliant withJJ's wellbeing criteria and with MNS's wellbeing orientation, and column(228) for results substantially compliant with JJ's wellbeingorientation and with MNS's wellbeing criteria.

Turning to one aspect of symbol representations and assignments, theuser (JJ) may elect fast flashing red for occurrences best matching withwellbeing orientation and with wellbeing criteria; which probably occurin column 220, but may also redundantly occur in column 226 or column228. Similarly, MNS may elect fast flashing blue for occurrences bestmatching MNS's recommended wellbeing orientation for JJ and MNS'swellbeing criteria for JJ's needs description; which probably occur incolumn 226 or column 228, but may redundantly occur anywhere. Now, evenwithout telescoping into any of the results represented by the symbolson the chart, JJ already knows about instant wellbeing risk and instantwellbeing maturity from the distances between the cluster of flashingred symbols and the cluster of flashing blue symbols on the currentanswers and solutions chart. If these distances are large, then JJ wouldbe wise to consider using an MNS social networking appurtenance toobtain consultation, counseling, consensus, or tutoring regarding hiscurrent orientation and criteria for this needs description.

Turning to another aspect of symbol representations and assignments,even without enabling any communications with members of the MNS socialnetworking community, by indicating a measure of the MNS user populationfor each row-column quadrant, the user instantly understands how regularor irregular his configuration of wellbeing metrics and needs is; andhow many or few teachers, colleagues, or students there might be for himon this topic. A user with a larger vision of wellbeing will probablyperceive an abundance of potential students and a scarcity of potentialteachers as public service opportunity; and the like.

Now, another iconic feature of the overview chart are a plurality oftime stamped icons, the overview chart location of which portrays theuser's wellbeing maturation. For example, icon-frame (203) representsJJ's reading level and respective wellbeing orientation and extrapolatedwellbeing criteria when JJ first started using MNS; icon-frame (201) isat the center of both rows and columns because it represents JJ'scurrent reading level and wellbeing orientation and wellbeing criteria;and icon-frame (202) is located according to who JJ was at about halfway between the MNS user starting and now—and because wellbeingdevelopment is sometimes a discontinuous journey, there is no reason toautomatically expect icon-frame (202) to be located on an imaginary linebetween icon-frame (203) and icon-frame (201).

Turning now from the GLO low resolution overview chart to the GLO higherresolution user navigating fish-eye overlay view, a default “discoverthe next layer of detail” frame (240) is the central row-column quadrant(user's reading level (210) intersecting with user's wellbeingorientation and wellbeing criteria (220)). By clicking or overpoweringthat row-column designation, the user's screen shifts to a respectivelisting of answers, solutions, summaries, thumbnail graphics, andpreferably appropriate social networking opportunities; with knownsocial networking associates and with new (potentially enabled for thisspecific needs purpose and respective relationship) associates.Alternately, the MNS user may shift the “discover the next layer ofdetail” frame to another row-column quadrant; and enabled to next layerof detail there (Mutatis Mutandis). According to other variations ofthis MNS fish-eye overlay, the row-column quadrant may be subdivided(such as by quad-tree, decimal gradations, or the like), magnified, andenabled to next layer of detail there (Mutatis Mutandis). By another MNSvariation, the “next layer of detail” may be organized into a anotherchart-like representation according to dominant variables therein; whichmay be user and/or MNS elected. For example, if the layer of detail isdominated by links to audio-visual presentations, then these may betwo-dimensionally sorted according to duration of presentationjuxtaposed with original date of presentation; or the like.

Predetermined formats for alerts and/or alarms may be used with any ofthe aforesaid graphical navigator aspects and/or MNS GLO charts; for anyof the symbols, clusters of symbols, row-column quadrants, or the like.For example, links to materials that might warrant parental approvalmight be covered with a flashing black alert overlay; and/orinvestigation detail that might be antithetical to the user's mentalhealth might enable an appropriate audio message; or the like. Anotherdiscussion of alerts and alarms will be seen in a forthcoming neuralnetwork related MNS embodiment.

In summary, using such an MNS organized navigator interface andrespective MNS GLO charts, JJ can optimize his “self education”searching and surfing experience by easily finding materials,falsifiable alternatives to the material, and respectively appropriateteachers, colleagues (virtual classmates), and students. Mostimportantly, by giving trustworthy consideration to JJ's perspective,MNS embodiments are integrated together, so that (A) JJ's wellbeingawareness most-likely becomes part of JJ's everyday consciousness, and(B) JJ's social networking experiences begin to match JJ's needs.

Now, here are a few terms, that are used to describe MNS embodiments,and some details that will help in appreciating their relevancy withinMNS embodiments.

In the MNS context, a “projection” is one or more locations ofinformation in at least one knowledge-base (database); which are theresult of one or more searchings of those knowledge-bases; and/orcompilations or summaries thereof, and/or to their respective locations.Thus, a projection will often relate to a location of a data base and toa location of data therein; locations being typically electronicaddressing protocol formatted labels.

In the MNS context, “wellbeing orientation” and “wellbeing criteria” arerelated with respect to an exemplary user. A “wellbeing orientation” isa collection of subjective descriptions and objective quantificationswhich characterize the user's attitude and/or preferences toward theuser's own wellbeing (or a subset of his wellbeing); such as to what agethe user wants to live healthy and what he is willing to do for thispurpose, his preferences and priorities, how much weight (importance)the user is giving to his short term health in comparison with his longterm health, does he prefer to take risk if this may bring betterresults, what are the important values of the user, (such as how muchtime and effort the user would like to devote to improving hishealth—such as by changes in the user's diet, emotional state, physicalactivity, social life, etc.), and other aspects characterizing hisbeliefs and values. A “wellbeing orientation” can be also a set or asubset of “wellbeing orientation” for specific types of needs orsolutions, or a collections (super-set) of “wellbeing orientation” formany areas. An exemplary subset of a user's “wellbeing orientation” canbe his preferences and weights for attributes of a need or asolution—for example: When choosing a restaurant—what weights he willgive to: the price, the atmosphere, the service, the taste, how healthythe food is FOR him (e.g. organic, fresh, vegan, glutton free), specificdietary requirements, cuisine type (Italian), distance, waiting time,his intuition of feeling about the place etc.

A “wellbeing criteria” is a collection of subjective descriptions andobjective quantifications relating to a user's “needs description”(described, per se, in a near-subsequent the next paragraph—below); suchas, for a user need “social life”—a criteria to increase or to decrease;or for a user need “body-weight”—a criteria to-gain or to-lose. Awellbeing criteria can be presented as a vector or list of preferencesor priorities or weights for the attributes or subsets of a need.

For example a wellbeing criteria for choosing an holiday for Mr. JS canbe: the following weighted priorities (, when +10 represent veryimportant, 0 don't mind, and −10 don't want): to stay in a 5—startshotels +9; to have opportunity to meet girls +10; to enjoy dancing +9;to meet people from other countries and/or cultures −0; to be most ofthe time in nature +2; to have free and quite time for himself 0; toclimb on mountains −10; to ski −10; to swim +2; camping −9; to drinkgood wine +8; how much money he is willing to spend on the holiday?$5000; and the like (to give a quantification of relative importance tothe user's criteria). etc While for another user, Mr. MB, his prioritiesfor a holiday are: 5-star hotel 0; he prefers to go on holiday with hisgirlfriend camping +9; to be in nature +10; dancing +1; to be in aretreat with people doing yoga and meditation +10; to meet people fromother countries and/or culture +8; to swim +7; drink wine 0; how muchmoney willing to spend on holiday $800; and the like.

Another criteria importance quantifying example relates to-diet wherein:Ms. BR preferences/weights for diet: healthy food +10; sweets −5;organic fruits and vegetables +10; fresh fruits and vegetables but notorganic +8; nuts +8; bread with gluten −10 (she prefers gluten free);meat −10 (not at all); Trans fat −10; foods contain omega 3 such as flaxseeds +9; food contain high level of sugar; −9; processed food −9; rawfood +9; water (she—prefers Mineral water): 10; filtered water 8; tapwater 1; etc. Ms. CB priorities are; healthy food +5; sweets +10;organic fruits and vegetables +1; fresh fruits and veg but not organic+1; nuts +0; bread with gluten +8 (she loves bread); meat +9 Trans fat(margarine) +5; food contain omega 3 0; food contain high level ofsugar; +8; processed food +9; row food 0; water—(she will not pay extrafor Mineral water): 1; filtered water 1; tap water 1; and the like. etcBR prefers to eat in a quite restaurant while CB prefers a restaurantwith music and many people. BR likes Chinese, Italian, Indian and veganrestaurants while CB likes French and fast foods restaurants. If BR orCB are searching for a restaurant in their area, the ordinary prior artsearch engine is blind to their preferences criteria.

Simply stated, for the ordinary dumb search engine of today, acollection of search terms are typically questioner wellbeing criteriablind; and also essentially assessing the search terms as if they arespontaneously arising (such as without connection to the user's specificwellbeing orientation or criteria). Particularly, for the ordinary dumbsearch engine of today, the questioner's wellbeing orientation istypically replaced by the commercial orientation of search enginesponsors, advertisers, and the like; which is, more often than not,worse than user wellbeing orientation blind.

In the MNS context, a “needs description” may be transformed (andfurther recursively transformed and/or substituted) into a respectivewellbeing criteria weighted plurality of substantially equivalentaspects; which conform to a users preferences (his consideration ofrelative importance of aspects and attributes) and are most preferablysubstantially in conjunction with a wellbeing orientation. These aspectsmay be selected from the group consisting of: attributes, tags,synonyms, replacements, substitutions, decompositions, transformations,proximate word clusters occurring in a knowledge-base, key words, markuplanguage codes, free form text, and the like. For example, a needsdescription related to improving the user's health, that is expressed ingeneric layman terms, maybe expanded into a broad cloud of relatedmeanings, which include aspects of diet balance, emotional state,physical activity, and a time line of urgency (which may be anythingfrom “only looking for a quick remedy” to “wanting to change lifestyleand improve wellbeing to best avoid any health problems like the onedescribed”).

There may be subtle or overt conflicts between a user's wellbeingorientation and a specific instance of that users own wellbeingcriteria. For example, the user's orientation may indicate a desiredbody-weight of from 60 to 70 KG (or some narrow category of BMI—BodyMass Index—a first order parametric calculation suggesting healthybody-weight according to age, gender, and height) while this user mayexpress a need to reduce body-weight, even though this user is alreadyunder his orientation expressed body-weight. MNS does not assume thatmutually conflicting orientation and criteria represent some kind ofvalidation error; even though that is also a considered possibility. MNSexpects that there are such conflicts and that these respectivelysuggest investigation into other aspects of the user's wellbeing; andthat some of these are in fact not personal to the user's implementationneeds, but simply part of the user's healthy need-to-know curiosity.Thus, returning to the body-weight conflict case, the user may therebyalternatively be expressing a need to examine other aspects of hiswellbeing; since a body-weight orientation with a conflictingbody-weight need may be an expression of emotional, psychological, orspiritual issues. There can be a conflict between the user's logicallong term wellbeing orientation and his short term desire to enjoy; orbetween his logical thinking and his emotions or desires. Simply stated,wellbeing represents a paradigm that is capable of being more holisticthan the individual's instant “needs description” instantiations. TheMNS embodiments may present the user with the conflict between his shortterm desire and his long term wellbeing orientation; and even advice himabout how to resolve this conflict for his own benefit. Nevertheless,the preferred MNS embodiments, but it always empower the user to makethe informed choice as he prefers. The MNS can include interactivetutorials to train the users to improve the process that whereby he theymakes decisions or choices to improve his total life wellbeing.

For example, many people have habits that they enjoy but that are notgood for their wellbeing (such as smoking, eating too much sugar). TheMNS can help the users to improve their habits that they enjoy more whatis good for their wellbeing; and help them to learn to choose products,services and habits which will improve their wellbeing, so that at thesame time they will enjoy better healthy meaningful lives.

In the MNS context, a user “input format” may be selected from the groupconsisting of: a journal entry by the user, a diary entry by the user, amemo by the user, a statement by the user, a private statement by theuser, a shared comment by the user, a publicly expressed statement bythe user, the user's needs description, a record of the user navigationfrom the needs description to portions of user-respective weighted andfiltered projection, specific questionnaires, interactive protocols thatcan include choosing photos, symbols, and any type of input. Likewise, auser “input format” may be a user response to a structured survey orquestionnaire; such as user response to: a multiple choice test; a rateor grade from good to bad, or from high to low, or from one to ten,etc.; a one word or few word answer question; or the like. The interfacecan be pictures or symbols instead of, or in addition to, words. Theseinput formats are firstly used to help MNS to know the user and torespectively understand the user; and secondly used characterize theuser according to predetermined standardized wellbeing metrics, andaccording to more personalized respective user's frame-of-referencewellbeing perspectives, assessments, and aspirations. MNS relates tothese input formats from both a Piaget-like perspective and aVygotsky-like perspective; as will be described in greater detail (inthe “Description of Embodiments—Detailed Discussion” section).

More specifically, to help span the distance between standardized anduser-crafted wellbeing characterizations, MNS input formats maytypically be anything from (A) Piaget-like structured quantificationsand scale oriented subjective grades, to (B) Vygotsky-like userdescriptive narratives and ramblings; both of which were invented toexplore metrics of development psychology. In the MNS wellbeing context,Piaget-like methods are typically suitable for comparing the user todata compilations; while Vygotsky-like methods are typically suitablefor transforming MNS into the user's frame of reference. Accordingly,the vertical dimension of the exemplary JJ self-study navigatorinterface is substantially Piaget-like and the horizontal dimension issubstantially Vygotsky-like.

Regarding MNS's collecting, knowing, and understandingdevelopmental-state subjective data and respective wellbeing-stateactuality for users, MNS applies Jean Piaget's methodology, relating toquantitatively testing subjects (regarding a predetermineddevelopmental-state hypothesis), and Lev Vygotsky's methodology,relating to evoking spontaneous free-form statements from test subjects(regarding their developmental-state concepts). In MNS use, Piagetrepresents embodiments of structured pre-organized researcher-generatedhypothesis testing questionnaires and statistical analysis thereof (suchas literacy levels), while Vygotsky represents embodiments ofunstructured interview questioning to collect and organizetest-subject-generated perspectives (such as cognitive dissonance).Historically, by these substantially different techniques, Piagetcrafted an external “theory of cognitive development” according to ageneralized “genetic epistemology”, while Vygotsky (for the same topics)crafted internal variations for an “emergence of the reasoning” whichcollectively generalized into “zone of proximal development” ontologies.With the MNS users, the preferred MNS embodiments resort to bothPiaget-like interactions (for objectified consideration of externallynarrated wellbeing attribute perspectives) and Vygotsky-likeinteractions (for subjective consideration of internally narratedwellbeing attribute perspectives).

The user will be able to view his Wellbeing Orientation and hisWellbeing Criteria; and to edit them. Of course, this will also beencouraged; both because the user is maturing and because the user isdeveloping a relationship of trust with his interactions with MNS.

In the MNS context, a “wellbeing currency” may be selected from thegroup consisting of: goods, services, a valuation for goods or services,points, credits, rewards, acknowledgments, vouchers, coupons, financialinstruments, real monetary units, abstract monetary units, virtualsymbols, and the like.

In the MNS context, a “caste” of users (having understanding of aweighted and filtered projection onto a knowledge-base) may bespontaneously assembled from a large plurality of MNS users (i) byvirtue of these users having expertise in results found in thatprojection, (ii) by virtue of these users having experienced orgenerated a similar MNS projection, (iii) by virtue of these usershaving previously expressed curiosity about a substantially similarprojection, (iv) by virtue of these users having similar wellbeingorientation to a user who has initiated this projection (in search ofmatching an answer to his needs), (v) by virtue of these users havingsimilar wellbeing criteria to that user, (vi) by virtue of these usershaving something in common (e.g. age group, ethnicity, education, city),(vii) by virtue of combinations of these virtues, and (vii) the like. Acaste, or part of a caste, may be more ICT amenable to chat-room, forum,or web-event communications than to direct user-to-user communications.Accordingly, caste members may be presented with an ongoingschedule-sorted list of MNS invitations, while MNS facilitateduser-to-user introductions may be presented as a different list; whichmay be topic and time organized and requesting-party level and wellbeingorientation annotated. These lists also may form the domain of links fora Graphic Link Organizer (“GLO”) embodiment; such as are exemplarydescribed with FIG. 2 , and are likewise further described in the“Description of Embodiments—Detailed Discussion” section (below).

In the MNS context, a “life quality metric” may be selected from thegroup consisting of: a current standard MNS wellbeing quantification; acurrent predetermined wellbeing quantification performed at arms-lengthaccording to any individual or combination of academic, commercial, NGO,or governmental wellbeing standards (such as those describe above in thediscussion of “Wellbeing: A broadly accepted term-of-the-art . . . ”); adifferent predetermined version of any of the aforesaid quantifications;a subjective characterization of any of the aforesaid quantifications;and the like.

Concerning a current MNS wellbeing quantification, a number of factorsare preferably considered. In all instances, the first criteria of theseis life, wherein a best practices medical triage appraisal is attemptedto classify the life quality situation; as anything ranging from instantlife threatening critical, through interim acceptable lifestylevariability, to long term actuarial life expectancy relevant.Thereafter, MNS user profile complementarity assessment factors areexplored. One example of such an MNS exploration might be “How would theuser's needs matching potential be improved if the user were to beprovided with anything from an opportunity to receive charity or anopportunity to give charity (either being in any form of goods,services, or currency as herein described)?”. Another example of such anMNS exploration might be “How might the user have better access tounderstanding available knowledge if the user had access to languagetranslations services (human or automatic) between the user's languageand (A) a language of a user relevant knowledge-base finding, or (B) alanguage of a social network “helper” familiar with a user relevantknowledge-base finding?”. The ontology of MNS exploration returns (i) tothe prior art discussions (in the Background Art section—above) forhuman centric data systems, (ii) to the MNS context “needs description”(above), and (iii) even to the discussion on the “Further MNSApplication Examples” sub-section (below).

Simply stated, regarding ICT representations used to appreciateembodiments, an MNS life quality metric may be expressed as a vector inan abstract multi-parametric dimensionality wellbeing space; which inturn may be used to pre-orient projections onto knowledge-bases whensearching to match needs to respective answers, solutions, appropriatecastes, and the like. Furthermore, there are classes of problems andsituations where the quantification is a multi-parametric collection ofscalars and/or a multi-dimensional vector; and “the” quantification isan abstraction or transformation of that; according to an assignedwellbeing perspective or wellbeing paradigm (such as reference in the“life quality metric” discussion—above); and likewise for a plurality ofquantifications (Mutatis Mutandis).

Life Quality Metric can cover all aspects of the user life's attributes(global Life Quality Metric), or can be a subset of it related only to aspecific aspects of the user's life. Example of a global Life QualityMetric: if w(i) is the weight or the relative importance that a user isgiving to each specific areas of his life (such as: family life,carrier-work, learning-education, social life, financial, health,community, spiritual, leisure, security, environment, housing,transportation, communication, happiness etc); and SL(i) is the user's“satisfaction level” of these areas or his rating of the level of eachattribute; then the level of the users Life Quality can be calculated,such as is done in the following example.

The level of the user Life Quality can be calculated as a sum ofsubjective weighting, multiplied by respective rating (subjective orobjective rate or satisfaction level) of the relevant attributes. Thus,for an exemplary: w1×family life rating:(SL1)+w2×carrier−work(SL2)+w3×learning(SL3)+w4×social-life(SL4)+w5×Financial(SL5)+w6×Health(SL6)+w7×community(SL7)+w8×spiritual(SL8)+w9×leisure(SL9)+w10×environment(SL10)+w11×housing(*SL11)+w12×happiness(SL12);wherein the weight w can be a subjective relative important of each area(e.g. between 0 to 10) and SL can be a subjective rating value (e.g.between 0 to 100) for the level of the user's satisfaction of this area.

However Life Quality Metric can be a subset of the above for onespecific area; such as health or housing. It can be even a subset of aspecific area to cover very narrow subject.

Examples subset of health: dental health, or fitness, sleeping quality,satisfaction from the healthcare service or the family doctor.

For each of such subset area, we can have a Life Quality Metric relevantfor this area.

For example for sleeping quality: w1×not tired during the day(SL1)+w2×(can sleep immediately when going to sleep) (SL2)+w3×(can sleepthe number of hours that I want) (SL3)+w4 (don't awake up during thenight) (SL4)+w5×(enjoy my dreams) (SL5)+w6×(don't snore) (SL6)+w7×(happywith my bed) (SL7).

We can define Life Quality Metric for each area of our life, for eachservice, and for each product. For each life's area, or service, orproduct we can define its sub-areas or attributes. The Life QualityMetric for this life's area, service, or product can be a formula; andits simplest form is the sum of the weights of each attribute multipliedby the level of each attribute. However, it can be other types ofcalculations; which will map all the attributes (or sub“components/areas) into a quantity. Ideally, we prefer to create simpleformula that the user is able to understand, and to compare toalternative solutions with minimum efforts, and also to enable to addand compare different area by some way of normalization into a similardimension.

The user will be able to view and edit his Life Quality Metrics; andalso to view Life Quality Metrics, which can be averaging of all theusers or of a specific group of users. However his Life Quality Metricsdata will not be disclosed to a 3 party without his specific permission.The anonymous data can be shared to help other users.

Returning to FIG. 1 , this invention more specifically relates toembodiments of A Needs-Matching Navigator System (“MNS”), which is forimproving at least one state (of a user (170) of a large plurality ofusers (180)), and the at least one state is selected from the groupconsisting of: social, economic, psychological, emotional, pleasure,spiritual, medical states, and like wellbeing states; and the system hasfour software driven modules.

The first software driven module (120) is residing on a device (110)selected from the group consisting of: (i) the respective user's deviceof a first plurality of electronic communications enabled users'devices, and (ii) at least one platform enabled with electroniccommunications to the respective user's device, to a plurality of otherdevices of this user, and to at least one electronically storedknowledge-base. For knowing who this user is, the first software drivenmodule is interactively engaged with the user in creating, maintaining,and updating a profile (125) of the user. This profile has at least onecharacterization of the user's perspective; which is including at leastone needs-appropriate wellbeing orientation (or wellbeing criteria) ofthe user, and at least one privacy preference of the user. Simplystated, the user is expressing (A) not just “who the user is” but “whothe user might like to become”, “what the user's preferences are” (withrespect to his own wellbeing or any subset of it); and (B) what qualityof privacy the user prefers for the information that the user providesto MNS and for the activities that the user may perform within the MNScontext. Preferably, the user can always access his profile (that is thefull profile as MNS views it), edit it, comment on it, update it, etc.

For understanding what the user is looking for, in electroniccommunications with the first software driven module, the secondsoftware driven module (130) is for accepting and understanding at leastone needs description (135) of the (respective) user. This needsdescription is including at least one needs-appropriate wellbeingcriteria (described above). Understanding the needs description includesconvolving the needs description into a respective wellbeing criteriaweighted plurality of substantially equivalent aspects. Simply stated,convolving, in this MNS context, relates to combinations andpermutations of subsets of the needs description transformations(described above) which may be used (by the third software drivenmodule) to try to find complete, partial, complementary, or reasonablyuser significant related answers to the user needs description and toquestions, problems, and/or issues described therein. User significantrelated, at this stage, means where any of user needs “description”,need specific user “wellbeing criteria”, and/or general profile user“wellbeing orientation” have complete or partial overlap. Secondaryinteractions and assurances may be requested of the user, for instanceswhere wellbeing orientation conflicts with wellbeing criteria; howeverin the absence of affirmative user resolution, it would be presumed thatthe need specific wellbeing criteria is more hypothetical, and thegeneral profile wellbeing orientation is more actual (, however the userhas the choice, if the wellbeing criteria is more relevant to him).

For finding at least one such answer to the needs description, inelectronic communications with the second software driven module, thethird software driven module (140) performs steps (141, 142, 143, 144)of (i) projecting the understood at least one needs description onto theat least one electronically stored knowledge-base (190), (ii) filteringthe projections using the user profile, and (iii) strongly weighting thefiltered projection using the at least one characterization of theuser's perspective. Generally, the projecting is in keeping with theoperations of search engines and meta-search engines, albeit operatingwith a combination of key words; some of which represent the needsdescription and others of which represent the needs related wellbeingcriteria. More specifically, where practical, the projecting is ontoknowledge-bases having respective descriptors and ontologies(specifications) appropriate for the needs description. Furthermore, anexemplary filtering may be according to the users' geographic location,budget, language comprehension, or the like. The phrase “stronglyweighting” recognizes that however altruistic and pristine theintentions of the best MNS embodiments may be, there may be those whotry to convolve the users wellbeing with the “wellbeing” of advertisers,sponsors, etc. To the degree that the user's wellbeing remains dominantwithin the filtered results, this is an embodiment of MNS; albeit whenthe filtered results degrade the status of the user's wellbeing tosecondary, this is not an embodiment of MNS. A facile test forevaluating the complementarity and overlap of the user wellbeing withthose of advertisers/sponsors is to compare then using one of the lifequality metrics (described above).

For matching the user with access to portions of the weighted andfiltered projection (onto the at least one electronically storedknowledge-base), in electronic communications with the third softwaredriven module, the fourth software driven module (150) “gives” the usersome of these good answers and/or solutions (155) to the user's needsdescription. Specifically, this fourth software driven module provideselectronic communications links to these knowledge-base sub-addresses,summaries of content thereat, mirror images of content thereat, or thelike; so that the user may improve his wellbeing, and progress accordingto his needs. Preferably, this access is available for the user toexplore in an arrangement according to life quality metrics; which mayat least have the benefit of familiarizing the user with parameters andvariables of life quality metrics.

Concerning a communications topology (111) operable for these foursoftware modules, it should be appreciated that the linkage of eachmodule instantiation, with a respective next module instantiation, maybe direct, indirect via any other device or platform where these modulesreside, or via a device or platform (such as a server) where none ofthese modules reside. According to another variation of the topology,more than one of these module instantiations may reside on a singledevice or platform. Between the larger plurality of user devices,electronic communications may include direct peer-to-peer (P2P) Wi-Fi,propagated autonomous P2P Wi-Fi, circuitous server propagating Internet,combinations thereof, and any other wired or wireless communication, andthe like. (Wi-Fi: Local area wireless technology that allows electronicdevices (i) to exchange data and/or (ii) connect to the Internet.)

An MNS Social Network: According to a first instance embodiment of MNS,the fourth software driven module includes performing four steps (160);which inherently scale into a social network when they are performed bymany users of the large plurality of users. The first step is creatingan instant community for the respective user by inverse projecting (165)large subsets (of that user's weighted and filtered projection) backonto the large plurality of users according to this respective users'profiles and needs descriptions. This is how MNS comes to know whichmembers of the MNS community may have a common interest with this user;that common interest being best defined as this user exploration andelected accessing of life quality metric organized results of the fourpart MNS embodiment (described above). The second step (166) is thenfiltering any users out of the instant community using this respectiveuser's profile, wellbeing orientation, and privacy preference. Thisfiltering leaves kindred type users, such as those not only expressingexemplary interest in body-weight, but likewise oriented to losingrather than gaining body-weight; or the like. The third step is thensorting suggestions for potential bilateral and multilateralcommunications between the respective user and the filtered community;which is preferably accomplished by pair-wise thresholding (i)comparisons of profile, (ii) wellbeing orientation, and (iii)needs-appropriate wellbeing criteria. This sorting organizes thecommunity according to similarity with the user (regarding this need);albeit without skewing the results by cast aspects. Of course, for theuser, the fourth of these steps is then providing (167) access for thesecommunications to the respective user and to at least one other useraccording to the sorted suggestions. In a bigger picture, the unfoldingof many bilateral and multilateral communications (according to thisfirst instance embodiment) results in a social network (169) havinglinks initially formed according to mutuality of interest, purpose, andthe like.

Now, according to a first variation of this first instance embodiment ofMNS, sorting by the fourth software driven module include performing twosteps; which preferably provide some intelligent intuitive structure tothe user's appreciation of choices (he may have) to build and to expandhis social network. The first step is classifying the filtered communityinto castes of users (having understanding of the weighted and filteredprojection) according to at least one virtue (as described above);presented as a user-centric graphic navigation “menu” (like a polarcoordinate clock face), various clusters of links to caste similar usersappear at various angles to the center. For example, mentors who canteach and explain the answer or solutions to the needs description mayappear above, while students and curious lay-individuals may appearbelow; and the graphic interface preferably allows the user to drilldown into the relevant public profile aspects of these potential socialnetworking collaborators. The second step is presenting electroniccommunications navigator options (such as messaging, invitations, chat,mutual interest group formation, and the like) to the respective userfor networking the respective user into at least one of these castes;where in the caste is best represented by a member that the user haschosen, albeit may be already represented by a pre-existing groupmoderator, or the like.

Likewise according to a of second variation of this first instanceembodiment of MNS, providing access by the fourth software driven moduleincludes a step of presenting at least one statistic for a Booleanintersection representation of a mutual metric selected from the list:profile, wellbeing orientation, and needs-appropriate wellbeingcriteria. Simply stated, in addition to caste sorting or independent ofcast sorting, the user may be presented with a view or representation ofneeds description reflective community according to their respectivecommonality of life quality metric (as described above).

Having brought the user into a perspective dominated by considerationfor wellbeing and life quality, there are numerous permutations andcombinations of features which may provide added value and added insightto the user MNS experience. Thus, according to a second instanceembodiment of MNS, providing access by the fourth software driven moduleincludes at least one software application for the respective user'sdevice which is interactive with a module of the four modules, and theapplication has at least one pair of functions. What every one of thesepairs of functions have in common is that they can motivate the user toexplore and consider ideas to improve his wellbeing, and these ideas maybe beyond the user's current self-centric limitations (his orientation,criteria, time considerations, and the like). Simply stated, here areenhancements that may help the user for maturely thinking about choices;which apparently the user believes are out of his box or is not awareabout them.

A first of the pair of functions is selected from the group consistingof: (i) sending feedback (structured or free-form; MNS requested or userspontaneously generated; and the like); (ii) suggesting enhancing atleast one wellbeing metric, wellbeing orientation, or wellbeingcriteria; (iii) interrogating potential life quality by tryingalternative weight and filter combinations of the portions of theprojection (of the understood at least one needs description onto the atleast one electronically stored knowledge-base); and the like. In thiscontext, life quality may include both the life quality as an “MNScontext term” (as described above) and wellbeing orientation(conflicting or not) with wellbeing criteria scenarios (likewise asdescribed above).

A second of the pair of functions is selected from the group consistingof: (i) receiving notice of credit for a fungible currency unit forwellbeing exchange; (ii) receiving a personal-decision summary view ofpotential shorter-range resultant changes in a wellbeing metric for anaggregate of needs; (iii) receiving a life-strategy assistant summaryview of potential longer-range resultant changes in a wellbeing metricfor an aggregate of needs; and the like. In this context, motivation forthe user to enhance his own wellbeing may be achieved by any combinationof (A) awarding the user real, abstract, or symbolic value for hiswellbeing accomplishment; and (B) presenting the user with ideas,concepts, and even narrow life-choice suggestions for him to consider asways that the user can empower an improvement to his own wellbeing.

Now, preferred MNS embodiments allow the user ongoing opportunity to goback to edit and/or modify and/or alter his profile, weightings,preferences, and the like. Thus, according to a third instanceembodiment of MNS, maintaining a profile by the first software drivenmodule includes accepting user input (such as describe in the MNScontext “user input format” above). Simply stated, to the best degreefeasible, the user should always be able to update his profile and hiswellbeing orientation therewith. This does not mean that MNS must forgetthe user's wellbeing orientation history. Furthermore, according to afourth instance embodiment of MNS, maintaining a profile by the firstsoftware driven module includes: (A) expanding the user profile bytransforming the user profile into a needs description to further definethe user according to electronically stored knowledge-bases; and (B)allowing the user to examine the expanded profile derived from aprojection therefrom. Thus, another aspect of accepting user inputrelates to letting the user explore what MNS may understand about theuser; which includes references and content describing the user that MNSmay have found when expressing the user as a search term for projectiononto various knowledge-bases.

Simply stated, just like most users try out new search engines by askingthat search engine to search on the user's name, likewise MNSindependently builds an aspect of the user's profile from detailsgleaned by searching about the user. Of course these findings are not anexpression of the user's wellbeing orientation, but they may representaspects of external perceptions of that orientation. Part of the userinput to MNS may include confirmation, validation, correction, or denialof these external knowledge-base derived user profile findings. Incompliance with many jurisdictions, the user may empower MNS to protestsuch user specific items; such as directly to the respectiveknowledge-base and/or to respectively responsible data privacyregulatory agencies. Recursively, in instances where a user is plaguedby public or private knowledge-base identity conflicts, the user mayempower MNS to diligently monitor changes in knowledge-base responses toquery about the user's profile aspects, identity components, name,profession, residence, and the like.

Likewise, the user's maintained profile may include products or servicesthat the user bought or used, information related to the user from otherthird party sources (such as medical records and information from healthexperts, consultants, coaches, friends, family or, tutor), and inputinformation from sensors (such as from personal accelerometers whichmonitor movement, information from cameras, video cameras, microphone,body sensors of heart rate, respiration rate, temperature, eye movement,etc.).

Further preferred MNS embodiments allow the user ongoing opportunity toexplore changes of direction for his own wellbeing; extending from shortterm changes to distant shifts of milestones and goals. Thus, accordinga fifth instance embodiment of MNS, maintaining a profile by the firstsoftware driven module includes accepting at least one hypotheticalwellbeing orientation; through which the user can see hypotheticalconsequences of possible changes to his wellbeing orientation, andthereby may help the user appreciate how to better his own wellbeing.For example, a youthful user currently giving a wellbeing orientation oflife expectancy goal of 60 years may experiment to see how MNS wouldrespond to his needs if his was the actuarial average life expectancyfor his profile particulars (perhaps 80 years); or to see how MNS wouldrespond to his needs if his wellbeing life goal life expectancy was setto an optimistic 120 years. By another example, the user couldappreciate existing biases by exploring what the MNS consequences wouldbe if the user had a different gender, a different age, a differentrace, a different present location of residence, of if the user knowsanother language, or the like. Likewise, according a sixth instanceembodiment of MNS, accepting and understanding at least one needsdescription of the respective user by the second software driven moduleincludes simulating at least one hypothetical wellbeing criteria;through which the user can begin to appreciate how altering his presentuser needs wellbeing criteria could create a different MNS projectionuniverse-of-choice for him in dealing with, answering, progressing,and/or solving that need.

While the user exploring hypothetical wellbeing orientations andhypothetical wellbeing criteria encourages the user to consider new anddifferent life directed alternative, there are always models ofwellbeing (that are outside the user's curiosity) which may provide evenbetter life directed alternative. Thus, according a seventh instanceembodiment of MNS, convolving by the second software driven moduleincludes: (A) simulating using combinations of iterative perturbationsabout the at least one wellbeing orientation and about the at least oneneeds-appropriate wellbeing criteria; (B) evaluating the simulationresultant weighted and filtered projections using a life quality metric;(C) extracting the projections having a life quality metric that isequal to or greater than a respective life quality metric for acombination of the user's wellbeing orientation and wellbeing criteria;(D) sorting the extraction according to respective future flourishinglife longevity horizon distance; (E) presenting the user with access (i)to statistics describing the sorted extraction (such as some specific“small change” could give you a longer life!) and (ii) to any userselected instantiation of an extracted projection; and (F) any of a vastassortment of mathematics and/or heuristics suggested alternativesconsistent with any of the aforesaid steps (A-E). Preferably, MNS isusing valuable processing time (available between real-time users'requests and transactions) to substantially “contemplate” the user as acomplete representation including the user's (i) profile, orientation,and history thereof; (ii) the entire collection of his needs, criteria,and his respective decisions thereto; and (iii) the like. Likewise,according an eighth instance embodiment of MNS, weighting the filteredprojection by the third software driven module includes: (A) tryinghypothetical substantially proximate (realistically user possible)perturbations of the characterization; (B) searching therewith for atleast one respective knowledge-base projected instantiation having abetter life quality metric wellbeing quantification than theknowledge-base portions derived according to the at least one wellbeingorientation and the at least one needs-appropriate wellbeing criteria;and (C) presenting the user with access (i) to statistics describing andcomparing respective future flourishing life longevity horizon distancesfor (i) the at least one respective better life quality metricknowledge-base projected instantiation and (ii) any user selectedinstantiation of an extracted projection.

Returning to the issues of communications topology for these foursoftware modules (described above), according a ninth instanceembodiment of MNS, the respective user's device of a first plurality ofelectronic communications enabled users' devices is a mobile device.Given the ongoing convergence of mobile device functionality, the mobiledevice of the present invention may be a smart-phone or a smart-watch;and/or it may be any data communications empowered personal device foraccepting or conveying audio, visual, and/or tactile information; and/orit may be a personal physiological feedback device, which may be relateto physiology parameters' monitoring and/or feedback and/or proactivemedical and/or pharmacological intervention; and/or physical and/ordata-communications empowered combinations thereof. Furthermore, giventhe peculiar mobile device architecture divergence between a tendency onone hand to empower mobile devices with ever-increasing residentprocessing capacity and a tendency on the other hand to minimalismresident processing in conjunction with the ever expanding datacloud-computing (shared “permission to access” resources) universe ofseemingly infinite data and infinite data processing resources, a mobiledevice may be a real physical device that travels with the user or itmay be a virtual device that is associated with the user's real-timelocation. According to a variation of this ninth instance embodiment ofMNS, a pointer to a significant portion of the respective user relevantknowledge base of the at least one electronically stored knowledge-basesis stored on the mobile device in conjunction with associated electronicdata storage in a data storage cloud.

Alternately stated, just as the SETI@home coordination of computingresources for a very large plurality of users resulted in a heretoforeunbelievably huge computational capacity, likewise MNS is scalable to avery large plurality of users; having a collective resources capacity.To wit, the MNS user community of devices, computing resources, and datastorage resources are capable of enabling respective user acceptablequality-of-privacy threshold protocols through which both computationcapacity and user profile data may be coordinated. For example, the oldfashion shout-in-a-public-place “Is there a Doctor in the house?” may bereplaced in MNS by “Which user of the large plurality of MNS users (A)is a Doctor—AND—(B) is within a reasonably near distance to the MNS user(who has this instant emergency medical need)?”; or replacing the oldfashion market survey with an MNS user profile survey such as “What isthe average school day wake up time for MNS users of High School age whoare located within a reasonable survey distance to the MNS user?”; orthe like. These too are MNS expressions of user “needs description”;both being exemplary of “reaching into” profile data that may bedistributed in the respective user devices and potentially neveruploaded into an MNS centralized knowledge-base. Thus, for a largeplurality of MNS user devices, embodiments of privacy assuranceprotocols are preferably enabled to allow sharing computationalresources and sharing of knowledge resources. Furthermore, if thedevices are enabled in autonomous or direct P2P Wi-Fi modes, then manyof the ongoing continuations of searching for hypothetical wellbeingorientation and/or criteria “needs description” answers/solutions andflourishing life longevity horizon improvements may be derived at a userdevice level, without necessarily calling on MNS severs, MNS cloudresources, or the like.

Returning to the issue of “user's profile”, according a tenth instanceembodiment of MNS, the creating, maintaining, and updating the user'sprofile by the first software driven module includes: (A) evaluating achange of the profile using a life quality metric; (B) normalizing anysuch change in the life quality metric quantification evaluation for theprofile according to a most current of these at least oneneeds-appropriate wellbeing criteria; and (C) for an account of therespective user, crediting or debiting the account with the normalizedmetric of a wellbeing currency. MNS can consider to what degree the useris accomplishing his wellbeing orientation and to what degree this“accomplishment” is an improvement according to a life quality metric(as described above); and MNS may then praise or admonish the useraccordingly. Because MNS has wellbeing centric bias, MNS users aremembers because they would like to take advantage of that bias, andreceiving feedback and feed forward from MNS is a preferable userexpectation. Simply stated, MNS acts like a friend and partner in theprogress of each users improving wellbeing.

Now, according to one model of an economy of wellbeing currency, likeevents for different users are not equivalent. For example, twoover-weight users are respectively encouraged to loose body-weight.However, the MNS reward for each losing one pound (or kilogram) wouldnot be the same if one user would need to lose ten pounds (or kilograms)and the other user would need to lose 100 pounds (or kilograms).Similarly, completely different aspects of a users change of profilemight be equated according to how the impact the user's life expectancy.For example, there might be an equivalent impact to the respectivebody-weight loss by the user meditating (or praying) a few minutes eachday, or the user engaging in community service (anything from joining acommunity service organization to taking a few minutes each day to pickup litter in the public way). Accordingly, a life quality metric can beused to evaluate most any change in profile, the user's wellbeingcriteria can be used to help normalizer the significance of that lifequality evaluated change of profile, and a wellbeing currency may beused to motivate (by reward or penalty) the user accordingly.

Turning now to another issue of “user's profile”, according an eleventhinstance embodiment of MNS, the creating, maintaining, and updating theuser's profile by the first software driven module includes: (A)applying a neural network to monitor dimensions of the profile for riskmitigation relevant changes to a life quality metric quantification ofthe user, and (B) transmitting to the user (i) at least one fastrecognition representation of the life quality metric quantification,(ii) an alert in an event of a substantially diminishing flourishinglife opportunity for the user, and (iii) an alarm in an event of a worstcase scenario being discovered beyond the respective user's currentfuture flourishing life longevity horizon. In this context, a neuralnetwork is a software driven optimization tool for solving (orapproximating solutions to) a large number of differential equations;particularly for providing a plausible set of respective weightings fora large collection of functional relationships between various cliquesof variables in a highly multi-parametric computation space. One (ofnumerous) peculiar aspects of neural network processing is that theorder (history sequence) of inputs leads to different solutions; amongthe often many simultaneously viable solutions to a collection ofdifferential equations. Accordingly in the MNS context, there are twotypically quite different user relevant results that a neural networkmay provide; one, being the current result arrived at by adding thelatest changes to the ongoing accumulations of sequential changes ofuser profile, orientation, and the like; and the other, being an instantnew evaluation of all that is currently known about the user profile,orientation, and the like. The sequential accumulation is characteristicof ongoing relationships, while the new evaluation is characteristic ofinstant arms-length opinions by an independent expert, consultant, jury,or the like. There are also often search heuristics which engage aneural network using alternative profile orderings from the historicalsequence, or which only use either extreme profile events or only usemundane profile states as inputs, or which use time-weighted averagingof the historical sequence; and the like. In the MNS context,independent of any MNS reward or penalty, it is of preferablesignificance to provide the user with an ongoing instant symbolic (orabstract) representation view of his own life quality; and to share withhim critical information (alerts and alarms) about how his current lifesituation, orientation, and criteria are risk sensitive.

According to a variation of this eleventh instance embodiment of MNS,applying a neural network to monitor dimensions of the profile includes:(A) electing a perspective selected from the list: the user, and a casteof users having understanding of the weighted and filtered projection(of the understood at least one needs description onto the at least oneelectronically stored knowledge-base); and therewith (B) abstractinguser proportional (i) vectors of wellbeing onto the monitoreddimensions, and (ii) derivatives or gradients of these vectors. This isbetter understood and appreciated when considering dimensions of theprofile as “current MNS wellbeing quantification(s)” (as describedabove). Furthermore, according to a preferred construction of thiseleventh instance embodiment variation, of MNS, WHEN the electing aperspective includes a caste, THEN the abstracting includes (A)crowd-sourcing the caste by transmitting a solicitation to a substantialplurality of members of that caste; wherein the solicitation includes(i) the respective user's current particulars of life quality metricquantification, of flourishing life opportunity, and of futureflourishing life longevity horizon; and (ii) a request for the member toprovide at least one response selected from the list: advice, opinion,recommendation, comment, vote, and gifting to the user of some quantityof a wellbeing currency; (B) aggregating the members' response to form aconcept-picture of applicable collective best practices knowledgeunderstanding of the user's life quality metric; and (C) sharing thisconcept-picture with the user and with the substantial plurality ofmembers of that caste. In this context, a concept-picture is any offree-form text, illustrations or diagrams therewith, summary text,quantifications, metrics, statistics thereof, graphic representationsthereof, and the like.

Turning now to FIG. 3 is a schematic view of an MNS appurtenance foracceptable public access;

This invention also relates to embodiments of an MNS Appurtenance, forimproving at least one wellbeing state (as heretofore described),wherein the MNS Appurtenance (300) is comprising: a software drivenplatform (310) with (a) a public access electronic communicationsprotocol (320) for exchanging data with an MNS (330) (Mutatis Mutandis);(b) a data filter (340) for preserving respective privacy of users ofthe system and of a postulator of a query from outside of the system;(c) at least one first format (350) that is arranged to enable thepostulator to focus the query onto a caste of MNS users havingunderstanding of the weighted and filtered projection by at least onevirtue (as described above); and (d) at least one second format (360)that is arranged to enable the postulator to deposit at least one inputis selected from the group consisting of: advice, opinion,recommendation, comment, vote, and gifting to the user of some quantityof a wellbeing currency. Simply stated, this appurtenance allows simplexor duplex interface with a non-MNS user; according to the quality oftrust and quality of privacy acceptable to members of the community ofMNS users. The appurtenance allows individuals to partially experienceMNS, researchers to glean knowledge from MNS, and the like; and providesany of them (as postulators) to contribute knowledge, understanding,comments, impressions, goods, services, and the like, back to MNS. Byexample, a MNS non-member may use MNS to discover a need, and may thenuse MNS to contribute to helping alleviate or answer or solve that need.(as described in the identity confirmation process, a non-member is auser but his an identity has not been confirm or validated; and he willhave limited access to the MNS information and community.)

Furthermore, according a first instance embodiment of the MNSAppurtenance, the software driven platform includes a neural network(Mutatis Mutandis) maintaining (a) a current valuation for the wellbeingcurrencies (which is selected from the aforementioned group); (b) anormalization exchange index between the selected wellbeing currency anda plurality of other wellbeing currencies from aforementioned group; (c)a feed-forward model positing selectively transferring of a measure of awellbeing currency; and in compliance with the valuation, normalization,and model (d) submitting a transaction to the MNS to enact atransferring as an MNS stimulus using any of: loans, gifting, pooling,and aggregating of wellbeing currencies from the postulator to at leastone user within the caste. Simply stated, this “first instanceembodiment” opens up views of the MNS wellbeing currency economy;wherein the value of “favors” (as was described in the context of“Economic Issues” above) and other amorphous or abstract life qualityvalues.

This invention furthermore relates to embodiments of a scholarly MNSrepository archive portal, comprising (A) a software driven platformenabled for electronic communications interacting with a data-cloud ofMNS events which are arranged according to community and to castetherein; and (B) an archive of the data-cloud. These events include acurrent standard MNS wellbeing quantification; a history of how thatcurrent quantification developed and “evolved”; comparison to respectiveother life quality metrics; census style demographics of user profilesand user profile wellbeing “progress”; characterizations andcategorizations of (neural network) alerts and alarms; life events; andthe like.

In summary, MNS is about (I) appreciating the importance of wellbeingawareness, (II) having access to choose the best “appropriate wellbeing”practices, In the MNS “practicing wellbeing” means to have decision andchoices that improve the “wellbeing” of the member, according to hisWellbeing Criteria and Orientation, therefore the MNS incorporatedmethods, algorithms, systems and information, to assist the members tohave the right choice and help him to find the best solutions to hisneeds, to increase his “Wellbeing”, (III) feeling confident abouttrustworthiness, (IV) motivating each members to help improving hiswellbeing, (V) helping other members to improve their wellbeing, and(VI) creating mutual trust. In the MNS “practicing wellbeing” means tohave decisions and choices that improve the “wellbeing” of the member,according to his Wellbeing Criteria and Orientation; therefore, the MNSincorporated methods, algorithms, systems, and information, to assist amember to have the right choice and to help him to find the bestsolutions to his needs, so as to increase his “Wellbeing”.

Appreciating the Importance of Wellbeing Awareness: Wellbeing relates topositive Life orientation standards. Appreciating these standards givespeople better choices, better solutions, and a better life. Wellbeingappreciation motivates people to choose long term solutions that helpthem to have better, meaningful, rewarding, happier and healthier lives.Experience with wellbeing appreciation motivates people to explore andconsider ideas to enhance their own wellbeing; ideas often more maturethan a person's instant-goal limitations and life-history biasedorientation.

Having Access to Choose the Best “Appropriate Wellbeing” Practices: Latein his almost 70 years as a Freud trained Neuro-Psychiatrist, Dr. HenriBaruk often lamented “best practices” as typically relating to what iseasiest for the care-givers; even if contradicting the patients bestinterests. MNS is not about what is easiest. MNS advocates informed userlife choices. Because the user is always learning and experiencing,MNS's aspiration of providing him with informed life choice is anongoing process. MNS seeks to empower the user to define hispreferences, his wellbeing priorities, and his limitations. For MNS, abest answer/solution to a user's needs is compliant with the user'spreferences, priorities, and limitations; informing him about wellbeingvariability issues; and trying to catalyze his choices into reality. MNSis always looking for to access, integrate, improve ICT (informationcommunication technology) resources, and for better information,algorithms, and solutions; so that the user may profit from better realtime results and a better vision of how those results might impact onhis over-the-horizon life-quality. MNS is also about helping to create,facilitate, and manage a social network of members; wherein each MNSuser-to-user introduction is in agreement with the users' respectiveprofile and needs expressions and the users' wellbeing aspirations. MNSoptimistically hopes that every mutually accepted MNS introduction willcontribute to a maturing and improving of wellbeing for the respectiveusers.

Feeling Confident About Trustworthiness: MNS wants users to partnermutual wellbeing together. Essential to that vision is to maintain MNSas organizationally transparent; regarding user privacy, wellbeingstandards, responsiveness to user feedback. MNS believes that a socialnetwork facilitating serves at least three purposes; helping users toengage other users for better understanding of instantly availableknowledge, helping users to organize into mutual ongoing wellbeing(orientation and/or criteria) grouping, and enabling lasting bonds ofwellbeing supportive friendship between users. For MNS, the quality ofuser knowledge improves with understanding; and social networking usersto other users who can help facilitate such understand is among ourhighest wellbeing ideals. In order to further this ideal, to make iteasier for users to help empower improved collective wellbeing, MNS isalso committed to help facilitate a fungible unit for wellbeing exchangecurrency.

DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS Detailed Discussion

It is a core motivation of central embodiments of MNS to network theuser into best-appropriate answers and solutions to user's needs.According to many MNS embodiments, this is accomplished by (A) knowingthe user, (B) understanding the user's needs, (C) accepting the user'sperspective, (D) finding best-appropriate answers for the user's needs,and (E) preferably to provide appurtenances for networking the user intothose answers. For many information systems, “best-appropriate” istypically biased by the commercial interests of the systems provider;often because knowledge of the user is a valuable commodity toadvertisers, direct marketers, planners, credit agencies, and the like.Simply stated, for most systems, “best-appropriate” is not altruistic tothe user's needs. For MNS, “best-appropriate” is typically biased by theuser's own choices and values; even though the user is actually usingthe needs navigator to try to get “out of his own box”—which is toaccess (or verify) possible solutions to his own needs. Accordingly, theuser's values and choices are interactively evolving as the user becomesaware of alternatives and new choices; which, in turn, may beneficiallychange the user's needs.

Furthermore, by networking the user into those answers, MNS istrustworthy best-practices user resource; rather than a totalitarianbig-brother. Simply stated, in juxtaposition to commercial systems, thecore values of MNS are integrity, trust, user privacy, altruism, andrespect for user values and preferences; which is to be innately loyalto the user. MNS helps a user to define his own needs, to explore thesolutions to his needs, and to network him with respective knowledge ofmeans to increase his life-flourishing level of wellbeing. Embodimentsand expressions of MNS values are helpful for expanding the user horizonto directly network between user needs and user best-appropriateanswers; which are typically outside of any oversight of MNS. Thus, fromthe perspective of MNS, matching a peer-to-peer social networking,between the user and answer's to the user's needs, is a goal of thehighest order.

Now, returning to FIG. 1 , preferably, “knowing the user” (120) is atrustworthy process of forming and maintaining a User Needs definitionspace, wherein an MNS builds an information cumulative relationship withthe user. From the perspective of MNS, a user is a combination ofvalues, purposes, preferences, inner “personality”, and profile data.

One aspect of the relationship between MNS and the user includes anaccumulative self definition disclosure which typically relies on theneeds navigator preserving the user privacy from both external searchand external analysis. A second aspect of this relationship includes theneeds navigator generating and accumulating a profile of the user frompublic sources; and it would furthermore of value for the user to beable to view and to modify that profile. This is not to imply that theneeds navigator can change the users public profile, but that the needsnavigator will typically give preference to the user's profile attributedisclosure over the attributes provided from external sources.

Nevertheless, there may be cases where logic heuristics of the needsnavigator suggest that the user consider that the public profile may bemore accurate than the user's self definition, and therewith that theneeds navigator may be more successful in matching potential solutionsto the user's needs when applying a version of the public profile.Nevertheless, the needs navigator will firstly attempt to make best useof the user self disclosure having preference over the public profilefor the user in all attributes where there is some measure of conflictthere-between. A third aspect of this relationship accumulates a userprovided needs description which may include free text, category labels,key words, user assigned subjective grades or ranks, and even itemsobjective evidence such as pictures, symbols, videos, audio recordings,scans of documents, or the like.

Furthermore, preferably, “understanding the user's needs” (130) is acomplex process wherein MNS may require iterations, alternativeorderings of steps, and even involvement of external entities. Oneaspect of understanding the user needs includes interactive andautomatic needs description classification, such as into key words,synonyms, markup language, or with further free form text. In thiscontext, the need my relate to any of goods, capital, credit, services,opportunity, association, know-how, or relationships between anycombination of humans, profitable entities, charitable entities, NGOs,governmental groups, professional societies, education establishments orthe like. Another aspect of understanding the user needs includes theeconomic perspective of the user for accomplishing partial or completeprogress past that need, such as the user need is to give, to receive,to barter, to purchase, to sell, or to credit as a financial instrumentor even as honor or redeemable need-points. There are further optionalaspects which may be useful for the understanding of the users needs,such as independent classification by a moderator (who can be a realhuman being, a virtual software agent, or even changing combinations ofthese) who may be selected by matching with user classification, systemclassification, or the like. Thereafter, at least one such moderator mayinteractively work with the user to improve scope and detail to theneeds disclosure, to the needs classification, and to help design aprogram or scenario that structures the user need into sub-needs, steps,processes, components, attributes, or the like; as appropriate.Independently or in conjunction with the moderator, these optionalaspects may be wholly or partially accomplished by the system or byaffiliates of the system; such as by using automatic or semi automaticprograms, by navigating the user through appropriate educations modules,or by directly networking the user into appropriate support groups, needspecific targeting agencies, or the like.

Now that there is a more ontological understanding of a user's needs,MNS will preferably begin a process of accepting the user's perspective.For virtually every aspect of accepting the user's perspective, it isappropriate to establish both a transformation into the user's solutionspace orientation, perspective, and vantage, and to the user assigned orsuggested cut-off filter parameters for each dimension of that abstractuser solution-space. Exemplary aspects of this perspective may include(A) by availability, such as instant, near term, conditional onqualification, potential, on a waiting list, indeterminate, or the like;(B) by duration, such as once, over the course of a few instances, untilconditions change, for the life of the user, in perpetuity, or the like;(C) by cost, (D) by eligibility, (E) by proximity, such as to the user'scurrent location or to locations that the user accepts as potentiallyviable, or the like; (F) by user similarity, such as to user-similarentities as may be provided by a support group or a chat room, by usersof greater or lesser experience in the needs area, such as is typical inmentor-trainee relationships, by user need appropriate experts, or thelike; and (G) by quality, by, such as might be proportional to at leastone combination of some of these perspectives (A-F), such as by level ofexpertise experience, by level of prior user satisfaction rating, or thelike. Remembering the range of human needs, expertise may be anythingfrom medical, dental or legal expertise to longstanding status as agrandmother, crisis counsellor, care provider, experienced user, orreading tutor. As an example of MNS attributes specific to a type ofneed (such as for a dentist and/or dental care), relevant attributes mayinclude: child-friendly, expert in implants, diligent about prevention,experienced for root canals; or attributes specific to a type of need(such as a school), relevant attributes may include: level of oremphasis on academic results, art, sport, wellbeing, happiness,creativity, participation, and the like.

Turning now to a core motivational facet of MNS, it is essential toallocate resources to finding best appropriate answers for the user'sneeds; now that the needs are expressed, classified, and understood fromthe user perspective. Nevertheless, there are instances where theseresources may have to be invested in searching over the horizon of theuser perspective expectations; firstly because there are typicallyinstances where solutions to user needs are outside of the user'sconceptual box, and secondly because user choice will exclude suchoptions if these are less worthy of user considerations than more userfamiliar (in the user's conceptual box) solutions. Accordingly,embodiments of the needs navigator budgets these resources to anycombination of (A) searching of databases, knowledge bases, professionalsocieties, licensed professionals, organizations, social networks, andthe like; and (B) targeted message query of individuals and groups whomay have necessary need specific knowledge to suggest solution orsolution heuristics appropriate to the user need. Merging these resultsand responses, the system may then present them to the user or allocatefurther resources to enhance, extend, modify, or restrict anotheriteration of this needs-matching solution option building process. Anoptional aspect to any stage of this process includes calculating awellbeing index for any combination of search, query, or result; andsorting according to the index or even filtering out results that arebelow an exemplary minimal moral threshold of the needs navigator.Simply states, while the needs navigator is making efforts to complywith the user concept of best, the needs navigator also is directed tomaintain a meta level standard for best as might be viewed for the user,the user's family, neighbours, community, and larger society; both nowand for any scale of extended or sustainable future.

Finally, appurtenances of MNS network the user to these answers; theneeds-matching solution options which comply with user and systemexpectations, including constraints. It is preferable for the networknavigator to present these results in a potentially multi-dimensionalspace format according to the user orientation; such as were negotiatedby the user in the ontological approach description (above).Nevertheless, since the very knowledge of these results begins to alterthe user orientation, MNS is available to transform this space intoother orientations; such as according to wellbeing index, according to ageneric perspective of an appropriate respective solution expert or thelike. All of these formats (and respective options for the user toreturn to previous stages of the needs expression, definition,understanding, and classification) are to allow the user a capability tofind a best solution to the user need. The tangible result of any ofthese combination is to allow the respective user to network communicatewith the respective user's MNS selection. This creates the option forthe user to add a social network link between the user having a need andat least one person or entity who may be appropriate to assist the userin solving that need or in progressing that need into a user appreciatedbetterment.

Returning to a basic aspect of MNS, a respective solution often includesitems of knowledge and typically also includes access to persons orentities having substantially complementary capability to the respectiveneed. Accordingly, just as knowing the user is a trustworthy process offorming and maintaining a User Needs definition space, knowing the useralso presents an opportunity for the user to authorize MNS to considerfactors pertaining to the user when seeking to find a matching solutionfor another user. This can lead to a curious anomaly in the aforesaidmulti-dimensional space format because some users may be ranked aspotential appropriate solution providers without disclosing their actualprivate details. For this to be accomplished, solutions should beclustered into substantially equivalent sets, so that private detail ofany user could not be induced from respective clarification-typerankings.

Now, returning to MNS accepting the user's perspective, for any specificneed or for understanding what motivates the user to manifest aneeds-matching search through the needs navigator, the entire idea of“best appropriate” is in fact a highly multifaceted issue. In a simplecase, best may mean any of the following: least cost, minimum risk,optimal cost benefit, most exclusive, most expensive, largest, smallest,or maximum or minimum of a formula or function (of a user, of hisweighting of the attributes of his needs, and/or of the rating of thesolutions' attributes provided by experienced users or experts), or thelike. Alternatively, best may mean according to the user's intuition ofwhere a new solution to an existing problem may be found, or accordingto the user's intuition of where a solution or partial progress may befound to an unsolved problem, or simply following the user'shard-to-parameterize sense of inspiration. Thus, where rational mini-maxtype problems may have easy to navigate search spaces for their solutionor iterative improvement, there are other problems where the user isasking an MNS to partner in the user's perspective of best. Exemplarycases are situations like: best way to redecorate a room in my home,best way to make my favorite recipe taste more exotic, best way to behappier when I am waiting on a queue, or the like.

Simply stated, just like best may sometimes imply some mathematicalmaximum or optimal, best may sometimes imply coming closer to someinstant indeterminate personal goal or distancing from some intractablecomplexity or the like. Yet a further, more complex or more abstract,notion of best is where the user is either seeking to be inspired,seeking to follow an inspiration, or to explore over the user's horizon;sometimes in a direction of the user's curiosity and sometimes is searchof a direction that would otherwise even seem counter-intuitive to theuser. Accordingly, the user is not exactly seeking knowledge, butseeking instant strategic partners, or advisers or experts who canprovide best solutions; and more specifically, the user is seeking anMNS social network facilitated introduction to that partner or thosepartners or into that community. In the social science literature, thiswould be akin to helping a user to apply to an “invisible college”,which is a clique or cluster of mutual interest collaborators; where theinterest may be spontaneously arising (such as an instantly arisingcharitable focus), evolving (such as a changing news event), or stable(such as a support group or a study group). It is in this context thatthe needs navigator wellbeing index takes on a special importance.

Another objective of MNS embodiments is to facilitate users to beempowered and helped in defining their preferences, such as to be ableto define general negative preferences (such as by filtering out anysolution which includes pornography, or cruelty to animal); and toassert specific positive preferences, such as for specific needs (suchas when they define a need to find a school for their child, they canhave specific preferences such as emphasis on child participation,wellbeing, social activities, arts, science, developing values,confidence, cost, etc.).

To better understand an exemplary MNS methodology, those innatelyfamiliar with Piaget, (Swiss developmental psychologist and philosopherknown for his epistemological studies with children) and his predefinedontology methodology, would be well advised to appreciate theless-structured formalisms pioneered by Vygotsky, (Soviet Belarusianpsychologist, the founder of a theory of human-cultural and bio-socialdevelopment) and his respective user-defining ontology methodology. Tothis end, exemplary MNS needs definition methods may often acceptVygotsky-type user perspectives, rather than trying to fit the (user's)“square peg in a round hole” (of predefined attribute classification);which is the typical Piaget orientation of most prior art data mappings.Accordingly, in the MNS context algorithms, there is a necessary step offinding appropriate knowledge that matches needs; while for the MNSAppurtenance algorithms, there is a necessary step of findingindividuals knowledgeable in the relevant respective details of thatappropriate knowledge.

Beginning with MNS context algorithms, as has already been wellunderstood from relational databases, each need can be decomposed intoattributes, sub-attributes, components, classes, and the like. Forexample, needs for finding a school for my child can have components,attributes, tags; such as: cost, distance, time (When the service has tostart and finish and/or do I need school starting ASAP, or for nextyear?); academic results, arts, music, sports, social activities,happiness of children in school, discipline, building confidence,motivation for self-learning, based on authority or child participationand empowerment, existing friends going to the same school, and the like(hereinafter exemplary attributes of this user's schooling “needs”).These needs can belong to a class: education; and to sub-class: learningfor wellbeing and/or character development.

For each attribute, the user will be able to define the weight of eachattribute including exemplary options: using a number or ruler tospecify 0 (not important) up to 10 (very important) and/or to express amandatory requirement, condition, exclusion, or limitation (in apositive or negative definition); such as, Catholic education—mandatory,or definitely to exclude.

The user will be able to decide that the user first prefer to define theweight by himself, or first to get recommendation based on other user ina group (such as one that the user belongs to), and/or choose to filter(such as I want to see the average, or use default weight of academicparents in my city only or see the preference of parents who are alsoteachers, or recommendation of experts in this field). The user will beable to change the weights, to save them, and to view his prior assignedweights.

Furthermore, MNS accepts and integrates feedback regarding experienceand knowledge of each potential solution for a need. Because the MNSfeedback provider may be contacted (even if optionally anonymously) byanother MNS user with a similar need issue, MNS motivates for users (andexperts) to provide reliable and honest information. For exampleaccording to an MNS embodiment appurtenance, by a friendly app which theuser get reward acknowledgment (or wellbeing points or credits) whenusing and/or providing information; such as from a mobile phone, tablet,computer, interactive TV, communications enabled games platform, orother input device that is connected to the internet, mobile network, orWi-Fi. Input may be provided by touch, speech, game play, and/or byanswering a telephone call, an email, SMS, etc. The reward can be anycombination points, credits, coupons, virtual or real money (currenciesas heretofore defined), or the like that motivate; including progressingin a scale of titles and roles, entertainment, immediate positivefeedback (text, voice, picture, icon of thank you, etc.) and anycombinations of these.

Since MNS can provide solutions which comprise a negotiablebest-appropriate transition space between Piaget and Vygotskyontological methods, the list of needs, attributes and solutions canalso be created and updated by combination of input by experts, input byusers, input by software (using other information such as the internet,data bases, etc.).

Each user will be identified to authenticate that the user represents areal user. MNS may use combinations of methods to validate andauthenticate users, such as telephone numbers, names, address, date ofbirth, recommendation by other users, bank accounts, passport numberetc.

When the user defines a need, the user may be able to define how urgentthe user requires to see a solution (ASAP, in a hour, day, week), howmany solutions the user would like to see, what will be their orderingcriteria (such as by cost, distance, height score etc.), to filter outaspects and attribute combinations before and after the user receivesthe solution list, specific types of solution, or specific solution, andthe user will be able to choose a subset of the solution list. An MNSsearch algorithm finds a short list of the best solutions which givehighest score between the attributes of the user; including the weightsof each attributes, the potential solutions with the score (or rate) ofeach attribute, and total score. When users provide information andfeedback about specific solutions, MNS will collect some parametersabout the respective user and providers. MNS saves the feedbackinformation from the user with the user's profile (e.g. age, location,profession, education etc.); thereby helping to build better filterquality for later results of specific types of users. MNS may employvolunteers and/or experts to manage and moderate the information, filterout users who do not comply with MNS ethics and regulations (such asthose who are not honest, try to promote their own solution or friend'ssolution, etc.) Preferably, MNS includes experts, who can provideprofessional input and explanation that can help other users; and mostpreferably, these experts will be available for consultation in theirareas of expertise. These experts are the educators of those who needtheir expertise. Thus, the expert contributing structure and suggestion(integrated into MNS), to help the user define needs and attributes,benefits both the experts and the users.

Important needs and solutions come in different scales, from individualto global class, and general wellbeing. Accordingly, appreciatingexperts and their respective fields of expertise often includesprofiling additional information, such as research publications,specific types of methods, “schools” of solutions (what is Chi Kung,what is Steiner education, what is child participation, how it can beevaluated and implemented, etc.). Experts may also differ in the waysthat they help to define short term and long term priorities, and thelike.

From the Piaget methodology vantage, specific needs and solutions canincorporate specific known matching algorithms between needs definitionsand knowledge-bases of solutions; whereas alternative experts and moreamorphous needs generally rely on Vygotsky type methodologies, andemerging algorithms, to calculate level of need, of attribute, of scorefor specific solution, etc. For example, in the areas of known matchingalgorithms between needs definitions and knowledge-bases of solutions,there are many general health programs devoted to specific healthaspects; such as cardiovascular health, mental and emotional health,dental health, fitness, Now, beginning a transition from Piaget toVygotsky type algorithm optimization, for cardiovascular health,exemplary MNS algorithm starts by establishing medical acceptedcardiovascular health scores (such as is provided by: Qrisk and/or MayoClinic—cardiovascular disease risk calculators, CardioSource ASCVD RiskEstimator, and/or Reynolds Risk Score—each of which predict probabilityof cardiovascular diseases), and then firstly searches and crawlsthrough MNS access databases to recommend solutions to reduce theserisks, and secondly correlates these solutions back to MNS users who areavailable as educators and consultants regarding such solutions.Furthermore, by collecting and saving the information, MNS checks whichprediction algorithms are better for specific population; and preferablyexplores and simulates improving them (by iterative combination ofexpert system with real human experts' feedback).

MNS matching algorithms firstly use existing known mathematics searchingalgorithms, and also specific algorithms for specific types of needs andsolutions. However the gamut of potential needs includes many problemsthat are not exactly solved by quantification of variables; such as theexemplary need for finding who can be my best potential partner forlife, and which of the many subjective criteria are most significant toconsider therewith. Thus, according to the subjective aspects of theneed and the shrinking size of population known to have expressed (orbeen observed) with like need, MNS transitions from appropriate Piagettype predetermined classification templates to define need to moreVygotsky type strategies to evoke descriptive aspects of the need fromthe user; such as aspects that are objective, subjective and evensubstantially subconscious information. Continuing the exploration ofthe “best potential partner for life” example, many users may choosepartner based on external appearance; but will find after short or longterm that they are not happy to live with the partner so chosen. Fromthe user, MNS collects many parameters, attributes, and feedback; bothafter short term and long terms, and preferably incorporate exemplaryneural network algorithms to improve the ongoing MNS matching algorithm.

As is better understood in the more subjective disciplines, MNS looks atobjective attribute weighting requirement, but allows significantconsideration to subjective attribution; such as, expressions of howmuch the user enjoys to be with the potential partner, will thepotential partner be an excellent parent to future children; can thatpartner help me to develop my self, career, meaningful life, and thelike. In a sense, subjective responses can be objectified (understood)by expanding them through attribute synonyms, filtering them accordingto profile of the user, calibrating them according to the spectrum ofexpression (some users express in degree of positive while othersexpress in degree of negative, etc.), and then matching “as if”objectified. As MNS incorporates more users and historical information,MNS algorithms and attributes improve; to help to define better theweights for each needs, and the best solution. Another aspect of thisimprovement is that MNS motivates and encourages members to interact, tobring friends as members, and to provide feedback and advices to improveMNS.

As a positive Life orientation standard, further objectives are for MNSmembers to feel that the MNS really is helping them (and others) to havebetter choices, better solutions, and better life; to be proud of andenjoy being members; to feel that they are part of MNS and that MNSbelong to them; for members to be keen to improve MNS; and to bring morefriends to MNS. Simply stated, these objectives arise when MNS motivatesmembers to choose long term solutions that help them to have better,meaningful, rewarding, healthier life; in contradistinction to typicalsearch engines that are stuck in the instantaneous now solutionmentality. MNS algorithms search to include solutions that show usersthat the best way to increase their happiness, is by helping others andthemselves, and not by just consuming more nor to be infused byadvertisements to spend and to buy.

Furthermore, as a social network facilitator, by algorithm and by useracquiescence, MNS integrates groupings of user with specific commoninterest, needs for-help, and needs to-help motivations; such as anetwork of people who want to explore and practice spirituality, vegans,artist, even religious group or political parties. Again, MNS keeps theinformation of its members privately and never disclose the informationof specific member to others. However, if the user chooses to send arequest to receive solution from a supplier (such as a Commercialsupplier), then an MNS appurtenance will protect the privacy of the userby substituting user identity to a pseudonym for the request; wherebythe user will provide his real identity and details (kept confidentialby the MNS) and MNS will create a virtual buyer who will be the externalvirtual buyer that others (including commercial seller/supplier) cansee. Regarding seller/supplier responses (to the pseudonym), MNS savesthe potential offers and solutions, filters and sorts them according tothe user preferences and weights, and presents the uses with the results(as many as the user prefers, according to his choice of order).Thereafter, the user will be able either to order the solution directlyfrom the supplier, or MNS will receive the solution via the virtualbuyer (pseudonym) and transfer it to the user.

Regarding time parameters, MNS includes user-defining weight for thetime of the solution, when it is needed, and for how long; such as: needa solution ASAP (health emergency), in the next few days, year, or thelike. Other types of needs are less well defined regarding time, such asfor a singular long term solution to find a partner for life, to chooseto learn a profession, or to accumulate experience in a self-improvementskill. Another aspect of time relates to the substantial differencebetween automatic spontaneous almost-instant decision making and slowerlearning-curve evolving rational decision making. The MNS appurtenancesare most helpful to mature the user, from the spontaneous to therational selection of solutions for needs; because the respectiverelevant-knowledge members associated with the user's MNS network shareexperience and understanding that the user is lacking.

Regarding currency, MNS allows interesting solutions to co-define with arespective social enterprise; such as for sharing most of anenterprise's profit; which is the case for operational expense limits asa percentage of donations. Likewise, for MNS embodiments, membershipfees or transactions fees will be reinvested in developing and improvingthe MNS and/or increasing domains and membership and/or allocation of asmall percentage as shares as bonuses for reward to members or foractive members according to their contributions or the like. Consistenttherewith, regarding currency transfers and payments, another exemplaryMNS embodiment aspect relates to using real (nation-state) currencyand/or MNS's own virtual currency, combinations or different types ofcurrencies, and/or alternative “currencies” (such as BitCoin,BullionVault, GoldMoney, and the like). Accordingly, MNS may haveagreements with banks, credit card companies, and other organizations,in order to manage financial transactions. Preferably, according to suchagreements, MNS' members will be able to pay to other MNS members (or toorganization) with minimum cost in the following exemplary process.

Each member will be able to open an MNS online Wallet. This can be inany currency that is authorized by MNS (real or virtual currency, goldetc). He will transfer to his MNS account any amount from his bank (orother organization authorized by MNS). The user will then be able to payfrom his MNS Wallet to another MNS user by authorising MNS to subtractthe payment from his Wallet and add it to the receiver Wallet. In thisway these transactions will not cost MNS the usual bank-to-bank fundstransfer charges; as long as the transactions will remain within the MNSWallets of the members. MNS will have to reach agreements with therelevant banks and organization regarding transfer funds and othercurrencies from the customers accounts to their MNS Wallets and viceversa, converting between currencies, managing these MNS Wallets,insurance etc. MNS may have its own (issued or certified) credit cardand/or debit card systems for this purpose. MNS may use Blockchaintechnology to manage currency transactions, and/or other information.

Regarding life-flourishing level of wellbeing, an aspect of eachrespective user-specific definition progresses from initial user-profiledefinition and respective initial MNS definition to mutual growth andcustomization; according to specific users group, total life authentichappiness, wellbeing, flourishing, satisfaction, and the like; asdescribed earlier, according to respective synonym, calibration, andsuch. For some people, the most important attributes can be hedonisticpleasure, where short term issues are more important that long termones; while for others, the greatest weight objectives are to havemeaningful long term life, to feel both healthy and satisfied, to senseaccomplishment and growth, to contribute to the society, and such. Usingattribute synonyms, respective user relevant filtering, calibration(normalization), and matching, MNS helps users to combine qualitativeand quantitative parameters with subjective information, so that theuser can express and MNS can include the user's intuition, advice (fromthe user's partners, family, consultants and friends); to help the userto learn to choose the best solutions, and to make better decisions,which increase their authentic happiness for the short and long term.Thus, MNS algorithms often take into account the classes of the users,their past preferences and weights, the classes of their needs and thesolutions.

Further objectives of MNS are to let the user define his priorities toinfluence his results; to be organizationally transparent so thatweights and priorities of results are not biased by MNS income noradvertisers; to protect user privacy regarding profile, needs, queries,interactions, and solutions; and to allow the user to see how MNSevaluates the user's attributes, weight, sub-components, need, feedback,satisfaction, and the like.

Another MNS example starts with a subgroup and a domain of needs,wherein the sub-group is young people (such as in high school orrecently finish high school or university student or recent graduates oraged 15 to 30) and the main domain of needs is how to chose and plan thenext stage in life. As in other MNS examples, some attributes aregeneral for the subgroup and others may be highly subjective andparticularly personal to the level of each individual; which correspondsto attributes easy to access according to Piaget type predefinedcategorical query, and attributes which must be evoked by vague Vygotskytype query (in forms like describe and explain in your own words how yousee planning and choosing the next stage of your life, etc.). Thus, inthe predetermined type query, issues arise like grade, level, examstaken, respective marks, subjects chosen, institutions and/or programsthat the user intends to apply for (such as specific university,apprenticeship, etc.) or to volunteer for or employment track (as ashort term plan, a gap-year, or as a path to further career development,etc.).

Thus, MNS may contribute focus for helping young people who areunemployed to find better solution to their existing situation for shortand long term; where and how to find job in their country or othercountries; how to use their time to progress and prepare themselves tohave better chance to work or earn money in other ways; to develop abusiness, learn a skill, become apprentice, get experience, volunteer(Mutatis Mutandis) to acquire skills, experience, and references; toachieve self support maintenance (such as to get free accommodation andfood—perhaps while addressing the growing needs to take care of elderlypeople—locally, domestically, or even as a foreign worker abroad).Likewise, there are many other instant career considerations; perhaps amixture of received accommodation, food, salary, and savings. Similarly,there are places that need volunteers for farm workers during specificseasons, retreat centers which provide free accommodations and food forvolunteers who help with cleaning, and companies who may takeapprentices. Ostensibly, for this subgroup, part of the MNS may be toenlarge the users vision of options. MNS also recognizes that these sameoptions vary greatly by location and national domicile; there being asubstantially great need (in some countries) for young people to findwork or to maintain themselves. Currently, Greece, Spain, Italy and evensuccessful countries such as UK have a large percentage of unemployedyouth. As a social network appurtenance, MNS can match a young personwith pensioners (who may have empty room and will be happy to let itfree to a young person in exchange of some help), families (with youngchildren who may offer free accommodation meals and some pocket money inexchange of taking care of their children part time), and the like.These are simple examples how the MNS can start in a very specificdomain in which there are unmet needs and no proper methods to findsolutions which can meet these needs in anything resembling an optimalway.

Now, regarding weights, for MNS, attributes with numerical values canhave different weightings according to each member's priorities;including for his wellbeing orientation and his wellbeing criteria.Nevertheless, because subjectively assigned user assigned weights can benon-linear, calibration and normalization (to a common MNS conversionstandard) may require transformation through a matrix.

Turning now to ten parameter charts for a user's actualization MNSresults, here is an example of implementing a decision support table tohelp a user to make a choice between alternative solutions. Each need isbroken down to attributes or sub-needs. According to this exemplaryembodiment of MNS, links to a Database of all needs, attributes, andsub-needs; and these have been accumulated for users, from othersources, and include relevant available objective data.

Furthermore, according to this exemplary MNS embodiment, this needs DBis MNS electronic communications compliant. For each attribute, previoususers or experts gave scores or rating (either absolutely—objectivescore—such as “percentage of students who continue to study in auniversity” or relative to other schools). Likewise, the DB includesnormalized relative scores, such as score in a “academic league table”according to specific attributes (academic results: best schools 100,worse schools 1; wellbeing score: best schools 100, worse schools 1; Artand creativity: best schools 100, worse schools 1; etc.). Each attribute(sub need) has a relative weight; and the MNS defaults for these weightsare created automatically; such as normalized to fit a linear scaledaverage. According to previous similar users or experts; the user willhave a simple ruler to change the weights of each attribute, and also toplay “What if”; so when the user changing the weight or any parameterlets the user see how the total score result is modified.

TEN exemplary parameters helping to define “User Need”: to “Choose aSchool for My Daughter”

Firstly, each chart (below) describes categories of rating scores for aspecific parameter; wherein the parameter may be objective (such as:cost of tuition, distance from home, average class size, etc.) or may besubjective (such as: reported from a survey of parent and/or studentperceptions of quality, sensitivity, discipline, etc.). Each chart thenstratifies the rating scores into discrete ranges and respectivelyassigns rating points for each respective category; such as one thru tenin the exemplary charts below.

Secondly, a user of an embodiment of the present invention, will assignsubjective weights to each parameter according to how important thatparameter is to his best wellbeing choice; according to his currentunderstanding.

Weightings may also be negative; if the user considers the pointassignment to be opposite to his orientation for the respectiveparameter. For example, a low income family may give great weight to afree or low cost school; an average income family may give moderateweighting to cost of schooling (in comparison to the weighting that theygive to other parameters); while a very high net worth family may belooking for a very expensive school (so that their child will only beassociating with other wealthy family based students), and will give anegative weighting to cost of schooling (since they actually preferavoiding free and modest cost schools).

Thus, on the one hand, using these categories of rating, the respectiveassigned points for each school are used as a basis; and on the otherhand, a user will define his/her needs (as to how important orunimportant each category is for their specific search) with respectiveweightings. Thereafter, the sum of (A) an algebraic combination ofrespective user need weighting, are multiplied with (B) respectivepoints for categories of ratings, to form a single score total for eachschool; by which schools can be compared for relative appropriatenessfor the user needs.

M: Mandatory (must have).

SN: Should Not (must not have).

A|A: Average (arithmetic average for a statistically significantsample).

GT: Greater Than (or more than).

LT: Less Than (or fewer than); by MNS default also including “equal to”.

M SN Value 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LT From >11 k 900 700 450 300 200 150100 50 0 £15 value 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 k Up to 1099 899 699 449 299 199 14999 49 value 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

Parameter 1: cost

user assigned weight for cost *7

The weight is a subjective weight that the users (parents in this case)can give according to how important this parameter is for them; e.g. ifthey are very wealthy they can give a low weight for the cost of theschool and if they can't afford to pay too much they will give highweight for the score.

M SN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LT From >46 41 36 31 26 21 16 11 6 0 60 valuemin. Up to 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 value

Parameter 2: distance (time to get to school in minutes)

user assigned weight for distance *5

M SN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 GT LT From 64 69 74 79 84 89 94 100 A|A 60value Up to 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 value

Parameter 3: academic results

user assigned weight for academic results *8

M SN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 GT LT From 69 74 79 84 89 94 100 A|A 65 valueUp to 65 70 75 80 85 90  95 value

Parameter 4: wellbeing

user assigned weight for wellbeing *8

M SN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 GT LT From 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 94 100 A|A50 value Up to 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 value

Parameter 5: art and creativity

user assigned weight for creativity *8

M SN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 GT LT From 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 94 100 A|A50 value Up to 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 value

Parameter 6: values (developing character, attitude, confidence)

user assigned weight for values *8

M SN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LT 50 From value 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 94100 Up to value 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90  95

Parameter 7: sport and physical activity

user assigned weight for sport *6

If a user thinks that sport is very important and would like their childto be have a carrier in sport they can give higher weight for sport etc.But these weights are not the score 1 to 10 in each row. The score foreach school in the row is multiply by the weight (of importance)assigned by the user. Notice that in other examples the score can be anexact parameter (such as cost of the school) while other of theseparameters are not linear; nevertheless they organize into a tablehaving parameter score categories—which in turn are multiplied by userweight and added into a total score. In this way we can even addtogether objective parameter such as cost or distance with a subjectiveparameter such as “how much my daughter prefer this school.”

M SN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LT From 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 94 100 50value Up to 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 value

Parameter 8: social life and friends

user assigned weight for social life *8

M SN value 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 She GT From She She We have . . She OKYes Be keen will 0 will not will not to will for happy accept accept beconvince agree her this happy her but may accept

Parameter 9:my daughter preference

user assigned weight for my daughter preference *10

M SN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LT From 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 94 100 50value Up to 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90  95 value

Parameter 10: facilities (grounds, swimming pool, gym, etc.)

user assigned weight for facilities *7

Using the user's ten parameter defined needs, here is an example ofscoring for 2 schools:

School A: Independent school with high academic achievement andexcellent facilities.

School B: Good local state school.

School A scores (average rating per attribute—such as has been reportedby existing and previous parents and/or students *multiplied-by* userweighting for the respective attribute):

Cost £12,000: score =1×respective user weighting 7

+distance 42 minutes: score =2× respective user weighting 5

+academic 96: score =10× respective user weighting 8

+wellbeing 87: score =7× respective user weighting 8

+creativity 86 score: =4× respective user weighting 8

+values 67 : score 4× respective user weighting 8

+Sport 93 : 9× respective user weighting 6

+Social 72: 5× respective user weighting 8

+Child Preference “She will agree”: 6× respective user weighting 10

+Facilities 93: 9× respective user weighting 7

=Total user weighted score: 434 (7+10+80+56+32+32+54+40+60+63)

School B scores (average rating per attribute—such as has been reportedby existing and previous parents and/or students *multiplied-by* userweighting for the respective attribute)

Cost £700: score =9×respective user weighting 7

+distance 10 minutes: score =9 × respective user weighting 5

+academic 81: score =7 × respective user weighting 8

+wellbeing 86: score =8 × respective user weighting 8

+creativity 72 score: =5 × respective user weighting 8

+values 86: score 8 × respective user weighting 8

+Sport 66 : 4× respective user weighting 6

+Social 96: 10× respective user weighting 8

+Child Preference “She will be happy”:9× respective user weighting 10

+Facilities 92: 9× respective user weighting 7

=Total user weighted score: 589 (63+45+56+64+40+64+24+80+90+63)

According to this exemplary MNS embodiment, MNS creates some defaultdata for the user and, much of the information is fed automatically bythe system; such as distance home to school is derived using data fromGoogle Maps.

Furthermore, according to this exemplary embodiment of MNS, a reportingsystem enables people to report their score during and after using theMNS service; and MNS feedback experience scoring will be on satisfactionrelated to each attribute. The system will maintain score tables withinformation from users and objective sources. For example, there may beleague tables similar to existing academic league tables, on characterbuilding, social life and wellbeing, and the like. The ratinginformation (such as rating of creativity, wellbeing, values, sociallife) is collected from existing and previous users (e.g. parents andstudents) while the weight for each attribute is a preference of theuser who is looking for the best solution to match his need ACCORDING tohis respective weighted attributes preferences. In the above example weused for each attributes a matrix in order to bring different dimensionwho may not be linear to a common dimension. In reality, the table canbe simplified, such as to having only a subjective rate and a subjectiveweight for each attribute (including features, aspects, synonyms,sub-needs, sub-solutions, etc.).

Further MNS Application Examples: Regarding (initial) MNS templates andstandardized templates to help define need, for each data base of needs(or interface therewith), a main need is decomposed into components andparameters; thereby enabling an XML (markup language) space for needs.Returning to the dentist example, what is rating by experts, by currentclients, by former clients, according to specializations, to demographicprofile of clients, to skill set, and the like. Therefore, building (andsometimes even traversing) the respective need MNS space typicallyinvolves, escorts, experts, and moderators; who help initially define,build, and redesign the space according to their perception ofrespective hierarchy of knowledge, weightings, and structures; and lateron escape from monolithic hierarchical views by applying feedback fromclients to form data structure shunts, which in turn enable a plethoraof other hierarchical views of the space. MNS thus partially enables MNSSocial Networking appurtenances because accepting at least one needsdescription from a user and parametrizing the needs description allowsMNS to update user's self-definition (profile) dimension; which in turnidentifies the user with other users according to their (unbeknown tothem) mutual hierarchical view preference among the plethora ofhierarchical views of the space.

Now alternately summarized in more general terms, MNS is a Livemeta-data Space wherein MNS appurtenances enable transient socialnetworks and persistent communities or relationships. MNS is a dynamicsoftware orientation accepting, modifying, and remembering user selfdefinition, profiles, needs, and solution navigating choices. As an MNSabstract space, there is an evolving user self-defining dimension, anevolving system proximate/wellbeing dimension, a; solutions dimension,and a suppliers dimension; and, each aspect of each dimension leads tocontent and to communications. The content is the one-to-many mapping ofneeds onto user-preference filtered solutions; and the communications isthe many-to-few mapping of those solutions back onto other users,experts, moderators, mentors, similar orientation users, and the like.An MNS creating network of knowledge directs the user to relevantweb-page, chat-spaces; while an MNS appurtenance creating network ofsocial contacts directs a user to those who may be more knowledgeableabout the knowledge that the user is seeking (to understand).

Furthermore, an MNS system monitor of user macro-activity and ofmicro-activity provides a guide to automatically enhance the userprofile; since MNS also can monitor and classify aspects of andindicators of attention, retention, decision, neural activity;vocabulary of search terms, and chat room language, vocabulary, syntax,and grammar—all of which provide objective and categorical metrics forenhancing the MNS experience. This experience includes social networkmatching to matching to peers, mentors, and providers of solutions. Anexemplary currency of shared favors is a voluntary time exchange betweenbeing a mentor and having a mentor. Accordingly, and consistent with theaforesaid, there is also a further preferred MNS appurtenance operableat a hub or network “level” whereby both respective-knowledgeorganizational certified moderators and users elected moderators may bedistinguished.

Returning to the range of distinctions between answers and solutions, inthe discussion of convolve (above), and appreciating that searching maybe for goods or services or physical/tangible assistance (sometimes alsoin conjunction with knowledge) rather than exclusively for knowledge, asecond similar aspect of an MNS appurtenance relates to solutions (forauthentic needs) as enabling an instant charity generator; comprising anaudit-ready template for monitoring needs, recipient guarantors,activity, e-funds and currency transfers, and delivery of physicalgoods.

Another aspect, in addition to value (score*weighting) of any parameter(such as cost of a service; health status at the present; percentagerisk calculated at the present to get cardiovascular disease in the next5 years), the MNS may store both historic results and also TRENDS ofchanges of these parameters during periods. The MNS may use these TRENDSinformation or gradient in similar ways as any other parameter or score.For example level of happiness can be depending on gradient (increase insalary/status) more than on absolute level. For example, a person whosesalary each year increases by 4% may feel more happy that a person whosesalary was higher but constant during the same period.

Another MNS Application Example: We assume that an MNS embodiment hasalready been implemented in London for 10 years; has collected and savedinformation from a very large number of people regarding many needs andsolutions appropriate for rating dentists.

Substantially each time that MNS users visited a dentist, they reportedthe following attributes:

-   -   1. Identification of the dentist (name address contacts).    -   2. What was the type of treatment they received (such as root        canal, implant, filling, extraction of teeth, crown, bridge, or        the like).    -   3. Treatment cost: How much it cost and a rating (do I think it        is good value for money: 1—no; 2—quite expensive 3—fair 4—not        too expensive 5—excellent value, cheaper than other, and the        like).    -   4. Quality of the results: rating: 1—not good at all 2—but can        be better 3—ok 4—good 5—excellent.    -   5. Friendly attitude (especially for children): rating; 1—not at        all, Dr was rude/stressed, 2—not friendly, 3—OK, 4—nice        atmosphere, 5—very friendly (Dr, explain everything and calmed        me down).    -   6. Modern equipment: 1—very old . . . 5—state of the art        equipment.

Therefore the MNS has, for each dentist, lots of collected ratings andrequired information.

When a user (John) has a need: “a dentist that can treat ASAP a toothpain caused by infection and dental abscess, and maybe a root canaltreatment”; The MNS will help John to define his need by presenting tohim the relevant attributes of dentist (and even default weights thatuser with tooth pain gave) and John can decide what is the weight ofeach attribute, according to his preferences. The MNS will check all thedentists in the database; and the average rating for each attribute; andpresents to John a short list of the best relevant dentist sorted outaccording to maximum scores of the total of the rating (by existingusers) time weighting (by John) of each attribute.

For example—if we compare 3 solutions: One specific solution is aprivate dentist; “Dr Watson, 24 hour-emergency dentist clinic in BakerStreet London.” (very expensive £400 but available immediately andexcellent quality). A second specific solution is: Local NHS (NationalHealth Service) dentist (free of charge but have to wait 2 days and thequality of the service is not so good). A third solution is a privatedentist Dr Bliss—John has to wait 10 hours and to pay £100 and thequality is good; (and each dentist in London can be another solution.)If John is very rich—the weight of the cost is not as important as thequality of the service; If John is short of money he may prefer to givemore weight to the cost and his preference maybe Dr Bliss or the NHSdentist.

Graphical Link Organizer (“GLO”): Finally, as was anticipated by theillustrative scenario for FIG. 2 , this invention furthermore relates toembodiments of a Graphical Link Organizer; which arranges large numbersof informational links into visual formats, thereby making understandingthe large number of links and selective examination of informationrelated to elected links more efficient for the user's purposes. MNS GLOembodiments are helpful for understanding (predominantlywellbeing-centric) results from an MNS type inquiry for answers andsolutions. GLO is also of practical ontological value for improvingsearch-and-surf information journeys (ranging from an individual and/orsocial-clan topical events scale, to a population-viral and/orhumanization-paradigm shifting transformations scale),Command-Control-Communications (C3) logistics, risk evaluation,emergency response, collaborative efforts (for group-ware, projectmanagement, team activities, crowd-sourcing, and the like), interactivedesign, and countless other intelligence-raising man-machine interfaceexperiences.

GLO includes electronic communications enabled software modules bridging(A) from a large set of mutually result-relevant informational links,(B) through a plurality of at least two user-selectable referencinglayer representations of respectively interrelated-results, (C) to agraphic display device upon which user significant sections of thereferencing layer representations are displayed. In the exemplarycontext of well known search-and-surf Internet experiences, GLO is arecurring intermediary between iterations of a search and a resultantsurf.

The GLO intermediary preferably provides at least two interdependentlayers of organized detail for a body of search results; which typicallyis a large set of mutually result-relevant informational links. Thelinks are of at least two types; such as access to documents, access topresentations (such as films, lectures, graphics, outlines, and/orslides), access to respectively concerned persons, and the like. As wasdiscussed above, a respectively concerned person, in the MNS context, isa person identified from an inverse projecting from the results backonto a population (such as of MNS members, and/or including potentialsolutions' provider, supplier, experts advisers, and the like) who areknown to have looked for and/or accessed these results (or similar). Theconcerned person may be of a same, similar or different level; and mayrepresent any of diverse wellbeing orientation, criteria, attitude,motivation, or the like. Thus, in that it is important to include andsearch for potential suppliers of a relevant product and/or aservice—wherein they can likewise be a members; thereby likewise forminga spontaneous or special category subset of members who are—suppliers.

Preferably, that is to best appreciate one aspect of how GLO is helpfulfor understanding results, the results include informational links to afirst large subset of documents and/or presentations, and informationallinks to a second large subset of persons respectively concerned withmany of these documents and/or presentations. GLO embodimentsredundantly distributes the informational links into at least twouser-selectable referencing layer representations of respectivelyinterrelated-results; a lower resolution overview map representationlayer and a higher resolution overlay layer.

In the context of this (immediately following) two user selectablereferencing layer representations description, “first category” and“second category” relate to respectively different combinations; as willbe understood from an example immediately thereafter. Preferably for athree user selectable referencing layer representations example, therewould be three respective category combinations, and so forth.

The lower resolution overview map representation layer is organized intoa plurality of portions. Each portion is a logical combination of atleast two dimensional-type first categories. Onto the plurality ofportions are displayed a plurality of map-legend defined symbolspositioned according to their respective first category combinationattributes. A preponderance of these positioned symbols respectivelycorrespond to clusters of the informational links; which havingsubstantial first category combination similarity therein.

The higher resolution overlay layer that is alternately either (A) aregion highlighting (targeting) part of the lower resolution overviewmap representation, or (B) a graphically organized representationrelated to informational links that were in the highlighted region. Theregion highlighting part of the lower resolution overview maprepresentation is user selected, when the user moves the region to anarea of the map; such as by joy-stick/mouse/finger (point or touch)navigating a substantially portion-sized frame (such as a rectangle,circle, blob, or the like) over the displayed map representation. Thegraphically organized representation of the user-selected links(targeted by the frame), which are arranged as a logical combination ofat least two dimensional-type second categories. These are preferablydisplayed with a plurality of map-legend defined symbols, which areproximate to their appropriate link and convolved therewith.

A GLO “first category combination” and “second category combination”example: User (“JJ”) wants to buy a used car. Using MNS with a GLOdisplay, JJ restricts his used car needs description to within hislow-hi budget limits, and within his geographical area.

To his first query, the lower resolution display indicates car symbolsmapped by asking price rows and odometer mileage columns (the “firstcategory combination”); where symbols for cars rated for excellentsafety engineering flash blue, symbols for cars with higher than averageinsurance premiums are underlined in flashing red, and small framesrepresenting similarity to JJ's previously owned cars (when he boughtthem or when they were at least one year old, and when he sold them) arelikewise proportionally positioned on the low resolution display. Anoblong frame, to let JJ switch to the next higher resolution display, isautomatically sized to include most 15-25 car clusters and automaticallypositioned to the cluster that has the models with the best ownerratings. JJ can navigate this oblong frame elsewhere over the lowerresolution map, or JJ can activate the oblong frame to view the nexthigher resolution display.

The higher resolution display is organized (“second categorycombination”) to show thumbnail graphics of the respective used carmodel for sale, with the position of each graphic column sorted into forsale by dealer, first owners, second owner, more than second owner,antique or classic car, and owner history unknown; and the position ofeach graphic row sorted by best available statistical estimate forordinary use maintenance costs (parts and labor) for the next 3 yearsfor a used car of the respective condition parameters. Any car on thehigher resolution display (A) having a known (by JJ) social networkingassociate of MNS known relation to a car of this type are under-lined inflashing blue, and (B) having social networking consumer advocatesavailable for consultation are over-lined in flashing red. With only tworesolution layers to this example, JJ may either select a thumbnailgraphic (to activate the respective informational link and thereby) tosee the for-sale notice, select the blue under-line to communicate withhis associate, select the red over-line to communicate with the consumeradvocate, return to the lower resolution display to move the oblongframe, or return to his query; to modify the query or to modify his“first category combination” and/or his “second category combination” orhis symbol assignment functions.

This method of selecting specific area from two dimension lowerresolution, into narrow choices can continue many times. A—the selectedhigher resolution area can become the lower resolution of the nextstage; and the 2 dimension of each layer can be also chosen by the user,with default option. In each area, the content can be any combination oftext, symbols, animations, photo/s, video, with or without audio, orvoice over, or the like. Some of the information can present links, suchas emails, URL, telephone numbers, etc. One of the options is that theinterface may enable the user to view three dimensional images of anobject—e.g. to view the car for all side, to rotate it, to open thevirtual car door, and to look at the car dash board. In the future maybeeven to try. According to another variation, a simulation or example ofthe product/solution maybe presented.

One of the exemplary layers can represent a map of an area—e.g. part ofa city where the user need is to find a restaurant to have a dinnerafter a theatre play; so he can choose a first layer to portray an areaof up to 10 minutes walk from the theatre, and then the user can askMNSs to find the best restaurant according to his wellbeing criteria forrestaurants (which is already stored on the MNS DB under this member).The MNS knows that this member prefer healthy vegetarian food, he likesChinese food and Italian food, and prefer quite places, His maximumbudget for 2 is £50. The MNS present to the user on the first layer ofthe map all the restaurants (up to 20—the user elected choice limit)which are opened now, within 10 minutes walk, within the user budget,and mark the map with symbols: vegetarian with V, Chinese with C andItalian with I. Restaurant without vegetarian choice will not beincluded. The user can ask the MNS now to order the restaurant inanother layer according to waiting time from minimum waiting time (up),and long waiting time (down), and cost of these restaurant—cheaper (onthe left), expensive (on the right). Now he can view how manyrestaurants which match his needs, are open now, have with less than 10minutes waiting time; and choose the range of prices that he prefers;and then go to the higher resolution layers to see more details. He cansee now only 3 restaurants answering this criteria, and ask to rank themaccording to his maximum wellbeing criteria. This include how healthy itwill be for him, how much he will enjoy the food, the service, theatmosphere, and the cost. He can go to higher resolution to view theexisting menu in this restaurant (as the MNS was searching the menusonline while he was looking at his screen). The user selected the onewith higher score, and 6 minutes walk, and the MNS sent a real timemessage to the restaurant and received confirmation for booking a tablewhich will be ready in about 7 minutes. The MNS recommended to the userthe best dishes that match his wellbeing criteria. This version of theMNS has also interface with the electronic payment feature on his mobilephone, so for the payment the user brought his iphone next to thewireless payment machine and confirm the payment with his fingerprint.The details of the restaurant, including the dishes that he selected,and the price, automatically were stored on the MNS solutions DB., TheMNS asks the user to rank his satisfaction from the meal—and especiallyto rate the dishes that he liked, and disliked. This information willhelp to improve the future ranking of the MNS for this user and forothers.

Note, hereinafter are four sections which further clarify and exemplifysubtle differences between MNS preferred embodiments and ordinary priorart usages of terms of the art; and of ordinary prior art systemsenabling items and/or functions associated with those terms. Afterappreciating these four sections, the respective definitions andexemplary inventive disclosures herein (above) should preferably bebetter understood.

Now, firstly, in light of all of the aforesaid disclosure of the presentinvention and of embodiments thereof, for this invention, the term“Wellbeing” (including uses such as “Wellbeing Orientation” and“Wellbeing Criteria”) is actually defined by context of use and by somereasonable constraints. As has become clear from the numerous prior artreferences, “Wellbeing” is first and foremost a term of the art; such aswas heretofore mentioned in the contexts of Gallup-Healthways, OECD,various NGOs, and the like. Nevertheless, for the present invention“Wellbeing” relates to mutually compatible states—with regard to aspecific issue or aspect; such as between a user and MNS, between theuser and a candidate for that users social network, and between a userand a database, etc.

While in general, a broad terminology category of “Wellbeing” in thisinvention including the respective specific issue or aspect may besomething as amorphous as “Happiness”, “Flourishing Life”,“Satisfaction”, “Meaningful life”, “unfolding personal potential”, orthe like, for a specific need, the term should be of mutual interest.For example, two participants (chosen from the list: a user, a database,and another user) may share a common interest in life quality withregard to many life issues and life aspects; however, these same two mayno longer be considered compatible with regard to quality of life if,for example, one advocates “longevity at any cost” and the otherstrongly advocates “early assisted suicide”. Similarly, two participantsmay share a common interest in health for many aspects and issues; whilediverging from compatibility with regard to diet, where one ispassionately obstinate that diet be restricted to raw vegetarian itemswhile the other considers maximum gastronomic experience to be anonnegotiable life experience preference.

From these kinds of examples one can see that the ordinary searchengine, which attempts to match participant based on some keywords (suchas “quality of life” or “health”), may nevertheless match mutuallyincompatible orientations and criteria. Simply stated, these aspects andissued constitute the “Wellbeing Orientation” and “Wellbeing Criteria”which may more properly match participants. Another way to express thisfunctional intersection is to describe a pair of participants asmutually compliant with respect to a specific need. Thus, the exemplarycontext is “Wellbeing”, while the constraint is a set theoreticintersection representing a harmony of common belief with respect to aspecific need. Here it should be noticed that two needs matchedparticipants are associated with respect to a mutual “WellbeingOrientation” and “Wellbeing Criteria”. While this may lead to theseparticipants becoming “friends”, the reason that they have been matchedis exclusively because they are of mutual “Wellbeing Orientation” and“Wellbeing Criteria” with respect to at least one need. Thus, thematching may be to find a best medical practitioner for a person with aspecific combination of medical and logistical issues; or to find a bestauto mechanic, or a best school, or the like.

Accordingly, mutual “Wellbeing Orientation” and “Wellbeing Criteria” areused to limit and focus search space results into an appropriatebest-practices narrow range of needs matching candidates.

Now, secondly, in light of all of the aforesaid disclosure of thepresent invention and of embodiments thereof, filtering, security,identity, and trust have slightly different meanings than are currentlyfound in the broad class of all prior art using these terms.Accordingly, it must be noted that one of the important principle of theMNS solution is to create Trust.

Today people can't trust solutions that are offered from the internet,nor can they trust existing processes of accessing the internet. Thelarge information service provider companies, such as Google andFacebook, collect (all the time) information about the users; includingwhat he is searching or looking for, his emails and transactions, hislocation, etc. This information is used for increasing profit of thesupplier; including by selling services and information to potentialsellers and/or to governments, by pushing profile targetedadvertisements to the users, etc. When a user buys a product or looks ata website, a “cookie” can be installed in his computer; that cancontinue to provide information to the organization who install it, canbe used to push advertisement to the user, and in the worst cases evencan be used to access his financial transaction and/or take money fromhis credit card or bank account.

The MNS preferred embodiments empower the members also in this area ofsecurity and trust.

First, MNS preferred embodiments provide each member with a contract inwhich it will promise to keep the information of the user secure, not tosell it or disclose it to other organisations, and to try to to find thebest solutions to each member according to the members preferences andwellbeing criteria; and will not be bias by receiving payment fromsuppliers or advertisers.

Second, preferred embodiments help the members to protect theirinformation and reducing their risk by providing safer processes andadvice.

Third, MNS preferred embodiments collaborate with Cyber security expertsto implement the most advanced method to protect its informationresources and help the members to protect their information.

In addition the members will be motivated to share information about anysecurity issues, and to help find and report any potential risk toeliminate and prevent any security problems.

One of the preferred embodiments' ways to protect the users' privacyinformation is by creating a protected security wall or interfacebetween the members information and potential invaders.

This can be protecting the users in both direction—when he sendsinformation and when others want to send him information. For examplewhen the user want to find a solution or to buy a product or service hecan ask the MNS to ask for this information or solution or servicewithout disclosing his identity. In some cases the identity must berevealed e.g. when the user want to buy a flight tickets his name mustbe provide to the airline, in many cases the name can be revealed onlyto the trusted supplier at the final stage of the process. This mayeliminate many other suppliers trying to continue offering solutions tothe members or accessing his information. In the same way othersensitive information of the members can be saved and managed in moresecured methods with sophisticated encryption; either on the memberdevices or on the MNS secured platform. Furthermore, the member will nothave to type and send these sensitive information element each time(such as date of birth, credit card or bank details, password and accessto specific site), instead the MNS will keep these information securedand reveal them only to the relevant organisation according to themembers' instructions.

Each member can have a choice if he would like to receive informationabout specific subject, product or service and from whom he prefer toreceive the information and which organisation to block or filter out,how often he would like to receive each type of information and on whichdevice and on what time.

Examples: today a young expecting woman who either search on theinternet to find some maternity dress or order such dress, is bombardedwith offers and advertisements because the website installed a cookie onher device or Google, who knows this information push advertisements toher devices to buy pregnancy items and few months later to buy baby'sproducts even if she is not interested a or in the worst case even ifshe had lost her foetus. With the MNS she will be able to search forrelevant maternity products via the MNS secure interface withoutrevealing her identity.

Another example: a member would like to replace his car to a better one.The MNS can advice him first to define his wellbeing criteria for buyinga car. Preferred exemplary embodiments will present to the members allthe relevant attributes for a car, and what weights similar users hadpreferred. For example: used or new car, age of the car, carmanufacture, car class (super-minis, medium, estate, sports, peoplecarriers etc.), car cost, car length, cost of insurance, cost of annualmaintenance, depreciation, reliability, breakdowns, safety,acceleration, petrol type and consumption, number of passenger, boot&storage, owner satisfaction, performance, ride comfort, handling, CO2emission, hybrid, electricity only, number of KM/miles with one chargeor one fuel tank, appearance (including shape color, etc), better forUrban driving, highways driving, extra features (audio, video,communication navigation), manual/automatic), easy parking etc.Likewise, if the member is driving only short distance in a city, careabout the environment, and can have free charging point at work, he maygive high weights for electric car features.

The MNS can present to him the best 10 electric cars which meet hisbudget, and rank them according to his wellbeing criteria, using therating of other users and experts for each of the cars' attributes. Ifthe user prefers a second hand car and it is not urgent, he can ask theMNS to find the best 3 cars according to his wellbeing criteria, withoutrevealing his name within the next two weeks. The MNS can create asearch for the chosen type/s of cars, can use existing information onthe internet, send a query to dealers, and ask specific members (whohave informed MNS that they would like to participate in car buying—theselling process) if they know of a good solution that matches the user'srequirements. According to the user's preferences the MNS can inform theuser during the 2 week period each time a good match is found, or at theend of the 2 weeks, or as often as member prefers, and present him withthe best cars found according to the user's preferences, and in theorder of the member's wellbeing criteria. For example, as adefault—maximum of the sums of the user weights, multiplied by the ratesfor each car's attributes which was reported by experienced users, whichsatisfied the user's constrains (within the right price, the rightdistance from his home, the right age range, etc). All this will be donewithout revealing the member's details. Only when the user has decidedwhich car to buy and from whom, he can contact this seller and buy thecar.

Members' identity confirmation: The MNS will have several alternativeprocesses to confirm the real identity of the members. Members can havea status rates such as new member, email confirmed, mobile telephoneconfirmed, home address confirmed, passport number confirmed, creditcard detailed confirm, bank account confirm. Bio-identity confirm Etc.

The confirmation can be done by sending and receiving a text to the usermobile number, by sending and receiving an email, buy sending a micropayment to the user back account or MNS account with a specific code andget a confirmation with the code from the users etc. In addition the MNScan check his identity on Facebook, and other public sources on theinternet, and or receiving confirmations from existing MNS members (whomidentity had been confirmed in the past) that they know the new memberand confirm his identity. Using this process of identity confirmationwill increase the reliability and the trust within the MNS community.

Now, thirdly, in light of all of the aforesaid disclosure of the presentinvention and of embodiments thereof, a new exemplary understanding ofinteractive self help may be enabled and appreciated.

As an MNS preferred embodiments' social network purpose it to increasethe wellbeing of each one of its member and total wellbeing of all itsmembers, one important component is interactive self help applications.Many exemplary needs of members are to reduce or prevent depressionand/or stress and/or anxiety, or to help the member to be happier orhealthier. The solutions for such needs can be a combination of externalfactors—such as to live in a better healthy location, or to have a lessstressful job, however many of these needs can be answered by trainingthe respective member to improve some of his behavior and habits, hiscognitive process, the ways that he reacts to situations, how he mangehis emotions, what he eats, if he is doing exercises and/or physicalactivities, the way that he made decisions and choices, his characterand personal qualities and values, his emotional intelligent, and evenhis beliefs. These are very important skills that, unfortunately, theeducation systems today are neglecting to teach. Luckily, many of theseskills can be learnt; with help of experts, or in many cases withinteractive self help applications that train the users to improve theway that they think, feel, and behave. Examples of such application is“beating the Blues”, an interactive self help computerised therapy thathad been proven in randomised control clinical trials, to reduce anxietyand depression even better that usual treatment by family doctors in theUK, for moderate anxiety and depression.

This example represent the first generation of interactive self helpprograms.

An important optional component of the MNS is to incorporate effectiveand appealing interactive self help applications in the most importantaspect of life.

These include preferred embodiment applications which are developed bythe MNS or by other applications that the MNS or its members selectedand recommend to use for specific needs. As each application will beused by many members, who will report their rating and weighting on itsattributes, the MNS will have a list of applications that can be chosenfor each user to suit his specific profile and wellbeing orientation andcriteria. For example, for some users with mild depression, a short terminteractive cognitive behavior therapy self help application can be themost effective way to reduce their depression. For other users, thatdon't like the cognitive training process, another program which guidesthem and motivates them (such as to start exercises, join a folk dancegroup, and find a friend) can be more effective. Therefore the preferredembodiments' MNS will incorporate not only self help applications butalso interactive assessments which help the members to define theirspecific needs and wellbeing criteria, and help them to choose the mosteffective applications that will maximized their wellbeing. Thepreferred embodiments' MNS also finds members and therapists that canassist and mentor other members; in addition or instead of theinteractive applications—either for a payment or for other MNScurrencies.

The preferred embodiments' self help applications cover any or allaspects of life. For example, how to improve your character, how toimprove unhealthy habits, how to be successful in an interview, how tocreate better relationship with your partner, how to help your child tohave flourishing life, how to be more happy, how to improve your garden,etc. There are many self help books today. However by combiningeffective interactive self help applications, with many members'feedback and rating of the applications attributes, and implementedmatch need algorithms, the preferred embodiments' MNS is able torecommend the best solution to maximize the member's life quality metricaccording to his wellbeing criteria and orientation.

Essentially, the present invention is herein described with a certaindegree of particularity, however those versed in the art will readilyappreciate that various modifications and alterations may be carried outwithout departing from either the spirit or scope, as hereinafterclaimed.

For example, it is reasonably anticipated that embodiments of GLO may beapplied to all of the aspects and features of the MNS embodiments andvariations described herein; that GLO may convolve and respectivelydisplay non-sparse combinations of attributes (including features,aspects, synonyms, sub-needs, sub-solutions, etc.) as dimension-typeintersecting pairs, in row-column chart type formats, in angle-distancepolar coordinate type formats, and the like; and that GLO has genericICT applications for helping users to navigate through and to understandlarge data sets, which may be wellbeing-blind.

Likewise, for example, embodiments of the present invention may includea mutual trust agreement between an organization which provides theNeeds-Matching Navigator System and a user of the system, and theagreement includes undertakings wherein (I) the provider organizationcommits: (A) only to disclose confidential or private information of theuser to third parties with permission of the user, (B) to enable theuser to view and update profile information that the provider managesregarding the user, (C) to be honest and loyal to the user, (D) to tryto find a best solution that matches the user's needs according to theuser's profile, and (E) to maintain the user's preferences and weightedcriteria as free from influence by a provider related supplier oradvertiser; and wherein (II) the user commits: (A) to provide trueprofile information regarding the user's identity, information, andfeedback, and (B) to try to find and chose solutions that may improvethe user's wellbeing.

Furthermore, in describing the present invention, explanations arepresented in light of currently accepted Knowledge-Economy theories andNetwork-Communications models. Such theories and models are subject toquantitative (computational) & qualitative (cultural) changes, bothadiabatic and radical. Often these changes occur because representationsfor fundamental component elements are innovated, because newtransformations between these elements are conceived, or because newinterpretations arise for these elements or for their transformations.Therefore, it is important to note that the present invention relates tospecific technological actualization in embodiments (as MNS, MNSappurtenances, MNS GLO, and generic GLO). Accordingly, theory or modeldependent explanations herein, related to these embodiments, arepresented for the purpose of teaching, the current man of the art or thecurrent team of the art, how these embodiments may be substantiallyrealized in practice. Alternative or equivalent explanations for theseembodiments may neither deny nor alter their realization.

Finally, while the invention has been described with respect to specificexamples, including presently preferred modes of carrying out theinvention, those skilled in the art will appreciate that there arenumerous variations and permutations of the above described systems andtechniques that fall within the spirit and scope of the invention as setforth in the appended claims. Thus, broadly stated, those skilled in theart will appreciate that systems and methods for the Needs-MatchingNavigator System, for social network facilitator appurtenances thereof,and for the Graphical Link Organizer likewise relate to ICT embodimentsaddressing wellbeing-independent, wellbeing-oblivious, andwellbeing-blind applications; such as are sometimes used in IndustrialDesign, Computer Aided Manufacture, simulation, animation, 3D-printing,medical triage, diagnostic and analytical expert systems, e-government,call-center information and transaction logistics, and beyond.

1-22. (canceled)
 23. A Matching Navigator System (MNS), said systemincluding: a computerized system including a memory storing a userprofile, said user profile including: a user-specific wellbeing criteriadatabase, wherein said wellbeing criteria database includes a pluralityof data elements representing predetermined wellbeing attributes, aswell as data elements representing user-specific weightings for saidpredetermined wellbeing attributes, wherein said MNS monitors data fromsearches and link selections made using said MNS, compares said datafrom searches and link selections to said user-specific weighting forsaid wellbeing attributes, and adjusts said user-specific weighting forsaid wellbeing attributes based on said data from searches and linkselections made using said MNS; a user-specific wellbeing orientationdatabase, wherein said wellbeing orientation database includes aplurality of data elements representing predetermined wellbeingpreference data and user-specific weightings for said predeterminedwellbeing preference data, a solution database, stored in memory on acomputerized system, wherein said solution database includes a solutiondata set corresponding to a predetermined potential user search query;wherein said solution data set includes a plurality of data elementsrepresenting predetermined solution attributes, wherein said dataelements represent third-party quantified solution attributes that arequantified based on a plurality of third party user ratings; acomputerized user interface, said computerized user interface receivinga search query from said user, wherein, when said search query from saiduser is determined by said MNS to correspond to said solution data set,said computerized user interface receives user-specific weightings forsaid solution attributes; wherein said MNS: retrieves said plurality ofdata elements representing predetermined wellbeing attributes, as wellas data elements representing user-specific weightings for saidpredetermined wellbeing attributes from said user-specific wellbeingcriteria database; retrieves said plurality of data elementsrepresenting predetermined wellbeing preference data and saiduser-specific weightings for said predetermined wellbeing preferencedata from said user-specific wellbeing orientation database; and adjustssaid user-specific weightings based on the data elements retrieved todetermine user-specific adjusted weighting data for said solutionattributes, wherein said MNS: generates a series of link selectionsbased on a user-specific score for said link selections determined atleast in part on matching said user-specific adjusted weighting data forsaid solution attributes with said data elements representingthird-party quantified solution attributes, and a Graphical LinkOrganizer (GLO) representing a user interface displaying a plurality ofuser-activatable links to organized search results, wherein said GLOincludes: an interface display area including links to search resultsthat have been determined based on said user-specific score, whereinsaid computerized system also includes a memory storing a treatmentdatabase including a plurality of provider profiles, wherein each ofsaid plurality of provider profiles includes a plurality of dataelements representing predetermined wellbeing attributes, as well asdata elements representing provider-specific weightings for saidpredetermined wellbeing attributes, wherein said MNS generates a seriesof provider profile selections based at least in part on matching saiduser-specific adjusted weighting data for said solution attributes withsaid provider-specific weightings for said wellbeing attributes, whereinsaid GLO also displays said series of provider profile selections. 24.The system of claim 23 wherein said MNS includes a user-specificthreshold for said user-specific score for link selections, wherein linkselections outside of said threshold are not included in the GLO. 25.The system of claim 23 wherein said MNS further monitors positional datareceived from a GPS system associated with said user and adjusts saiduser-specific weighting for said wellbeing attributes based on saidpositional data.
 26. The system of claim 23 wherein said MNS furthermonitors physiological data received from a physiological datamonitoring device associated with said user and adjusts saiduser-specific weighting for at least one of said wellbeing attributesbased on said physiological data.
 27. The system of claim 23 whereinsaid MNS further monitors positional data received from a GPS systemassociated with said user and adjusts said provider-specific weightingsfor at least one of said wellbeing attributes based on said positionaldata.
 28. The system of claim 23 wherein said MNS further monitorsphysiological data received from a physiological data monitoring deviceassociated with said user and adjusts said provider-specific weightingsfor at least one of said wellbeing attributes based on saidpsychological data.
 29. The system of claim 23 wherein said providerprofile is associated with a provider of psychological treatment. 30.The system of claim 23 wherein said provider profile is associated witha provider of medical treatment.